Cited by 499Nutrition and Health in AgingClinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyBody Composition Measurement Techniques

Nutritional status in older persons according to healthcare setting: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence data using MNA®

Cereda, Emanuele, Pedrolli, Carlo, Klersy, Catherine, Bonardi, Chiara, Quarleri, Lara, Cappello, Silvia, Turri, Annalisa, Rondanelli, Mariangela +1 more·2016·Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Background & aims Old persons are more likely to suffer from malnutrition, which may result in higher dependency in activities of daily living. We aimed to provide a quantitative synthesis of prevalence data on malnutrition and its risk as assessed by the Mini Nutritional Assessment across different healthcare settings. The association between nutritional status and setting-related level of dependence was also investigated. Methods Non-interventional studies published as full-text articles in English up to 31th December 2014 were searched for in PubMed and by reviewing references of eligible articles. Meta-analysis and meta-regression of potential sources of heterogeneity were conducted. Results A total of 240 studies/795 citations - providing 258 setting-specific prevalence estimates (113,967 subjects) - fulfilled inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. Prevalence of malnutrition differed significantly across the healthcare settings considered: community, 3.1% (95%CI, 2.3-3.8); outpatients, 6.0% (95%CI, 4.6-7.5); home-care services, 8.7% (95%CI, 5.8-11.7); hospital, 22.0% (95%CI, 18.9-22.5); nursing homes, 17.5% (95%CI, 14.3-20.6); long-term care, 28.7% (95%CI, 21.4-36.0); rehabilitation/sub-acute care, 29.4% (95%CI, 21.7-36.9). For every setting significant heterogeneity in individual study results was observed (I 2 ≥80%, P < 0.001) and meta-regression showed that study quality was the most important determinant. Finally, meta-regression of all the studies included showed that both malnutrition and its risk were directly associated with the setting-related level of dependence (P < 0.001). However, despite multiple adjustments, residual heterogeneity remained high. Conclusion We provided updated estimates of malnutrition and its risk in different healthcare settings. Although the level of dependence appears to be an important determinant, heterogeneity in individual study results remained substantially unexplained. The cause-effect relationship between nutritional status and level of dependence deserves further investigation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clnu.2016.03.008

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • According to a meta-analysis involving 240 studies, malnutrition has been reported in 3.0% of community dwelling older adults, 6.0% of those in outpatient care, 8.7% among those receiving home care services, 22.0% of those with in-hospital stay, 17.5% of those in nursing homes, and 29.4% in rehabilitation/sub-acute care.

    “According to a meta-analysis involving 240 studies, malnutrition has been reported in 3.0% of community dwelling older adults, 6.0% of those in outpatient care, 8.7% among those receiving home care services, 22.0% of those with in-hospital stay, 17.5% of those in nursing homes, and 29.4% in rehabilitation/sub-acute care [24].”
  • Reported prevalence rates of malnutrition are generally below 10% in independently living older persons and increase up to two thirds in hospitalized older patients.

    “Reported prevalence rates are generally below 10% in independently living older persons and increase up to two thirds in hospitalized older patients (5,6).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cereda, E., Pedrolli, C., Klersy, C., Bonardi, C., Quarleri, L., Cappello, S., Turri, A., Rondanelli, M., & Caccialanza, R.
Affiliations
  • Policlinico San Matteo Fondazione (IT)
  • University of Pavia (IT)
Corresponding author
Cereda, Emanuele
Venue
Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-12
Volume
35
Issue
6
Pages
1282-1290
ISSN
0261-5614 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2324717392
Cited by
499
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 44 · 2025: 68 · 2024: 68 · 2023: 60 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 65 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 2
FWCI
3.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Clinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
Keywords
malnutrition, older adults, Mini Nutritional Assessment, nutritional status, healthcare settings, malnutrition prevalence, activities of daily living dependence, nursing homes, long-term care, hospital malnutrition, home care, rehabilitation care, study quality heterogeneity
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Ambulatory Care, Community Health Services, Dementia, Health Facilities, Home Care Services, Hospitals, Humans, Long-Term Care, Nursing Homes, Nutritional Status, Geriatric Assessment, Nutrition Assessment, Malnutrition, Independent Living

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review