2011
DOI: 10.1016/s1744-1161(11)70467-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pp177-Mon Prevalence of Malnutrition in Paediatric Patients With Spinal Cord Injury

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The flow diagram of the study selection process is shown in Figure 1. In total, 54 full‐text reports were assessed, of which 36 were excluded: 3 did not contain any (separate) data on children (28–30); 18 were conference abstracts (31–47); 1 article was a report on the translation of a screening tool (48); 1 article was a study protocol (49); 2 studies were performed in developing countries according to the ISI classification (50,51); 9 articles were about methods of nutritional assessment instead of nutritional screening (13,52–59); 1 study contained duplicate data (60); 1 article was a report assessing the effect of nutritional screening on the acquisition of anthropometric measurements (61). Finally, 18 studies were included describing ≥1 of the following screening tools: Reilly Nutrition Risk Score (NRS) (2,62–64), the Pediatric Nutritional Risk Score (PNRS) by Sermet‐Gaudelus et al (12,26,65,66), McCarthy Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Paediatrics (STAMP) (16,18,26,66–70), the Paediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score (PYMS) developed by Gerasimidis et al (16,26,69–71), and the Screening Tool for Risk on Nutritional Status and Growth (STRONG kids ) by Hulst et al (17,26,27,68,69,72).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The flow diagram of the study selection process is shown in Figure 1. In total, 54 full‐text reports were assessed, of which 36 were excluded: 3 did not contain any (separate) data on children (28–30); 18 were conference abstracts (31–47); 1 article was a report on the translation of a screening tool (48); 1 article was a study protocol (49); 2 studies were performed in developing countries according to the ISI classification (50,51); 9 articles were about methods of nutritional assessment instead of nutritional screening (13,52–59); 1 study contained duplicate data (60); 1 article was a report assessing the effect of nutritional screening on the acquisition of anthropometric measurements (61). Finally, 18 studies were included describing ≥1 of the following screening tools: Reilly Nutrition Risk Score (NRS) (2,62–64), the Pediatric Nutritional Risk Score (PNRS) by Sermet‐Gaudelus et al (12,26,65,66), McCarthy Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Paediatrics (STAMP) (16,18,26,66–70), the Paediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score (PYMS) developed by Gerasimidis et al (16,26,69–71), and the Screening Tool for Risk on Nutritional Status and Growth (STRONG kids ) by Hulst et al (17,26,27,68,69,72).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%