scholarly journals Psychometric and Pragmatic Properties of Social Risk Screening Tools: A Systematic Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (6) ◽  
pp. S13-S24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nora B. Henrikson ◽  
Paula R. Blasi ◽  
Caitlin N. Dorsey ◽  
Kayne D. Mettert ◽  
Matthew B. Nguyen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Social Risk ◽  
Risk Screening

scholarly journals Nutritional Risk Screening Tools for Elderly Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Franciole de Oliveira Silva ◽  
Severina Carla Vieira Cunha Lima ◽  
Karine Cavalcanti Mauricio Sena-Evangelista ◽  
Dirce Marchioni ◽  
Ricardo Ney Cobucci ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Nutritional Risk ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Nutritional Screening ◽  
Risk Screening ◽  
Nrs 2002 ◽  
Nutritional Risk Screening

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with high risk of malnutrition, primarily in elderly people; assessing nutritional risk using appropriate screening tools is critical. This systematic review identified applicable tools and assessed their measurement properties. Literature was searched in the MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS databases. Four studies conducted in China met the eligibility criteria. Sample sizes ranged from six to 182, and participants’ ages from 65 to 87 years. Seven nutritional screening and assessment tools were used: the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002), Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), MNA-short form (MNA-sf), Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), Nutritional Risk Index (NRI), Geriatric NRI (GNRI), and modified Nutrition Risk in the Critically ill (mNUTRIC) score. Nutritional risk was identified in 27.5% to 100% of participants. The NRS-2002, MNA, MNA-sf, NRI, and MUST demonstrated high sensitivity; the MUST had better specificity. The MNA and MUST demonstrated better criterion validity. The MNA-sf demonstrated better predictive validity for poor appetite and weight loss; the NRS-2002 demonstrated better predictive validity for prolonged hospitalization. mNUTRIC score demonstrated good predictive validity for hospital mortality. Most instruments demonstrate high sensitivity for identifying nutritional risk, but none are acknowledged as the best for nutritional screening in elderly COVID-19 patients.

scholarly journals Comparing the performance of two social risk screening tools in a vulnerable subpopulation

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 5026
Author(s):  
CaraC Lewis ◽  
Robert Wellman ◽  
SaleneM W Jones ◽  
Callie Walsh-Bailey ◽  
Ella Thompson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Screening Tools ◽  
Social Risk ◽  
Risk Screening

scholarly journals Nutritional Risk Screening Tools for Older Adults with COVID-19: A Systematic Review

Nutrients ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 2956 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Franciole Oliveira Silva ◽  
Severina Carla Vieira Cunha Lima ◽  
Karine Cavalcanti Mauricio Sena-Evangelista ◽  
Dirce Maria Marchioni ◽  
Ricardo Ney Cobucci ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Nutritional Risk ◽  
Nutritional Screening ◽  
Risk Screening ◽  
Nrs 2002 ◽  
Nutritional Risk Screening

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with high risk of malnutrition, primarily in older people; assessing nutritional risk using appropriate screening tools is critical. This systematic review identified applicable tools and assessed their measurement properties. Literature was searched in the MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS databases. Four studies conducted in China met the eligibility criteria. Sample sizes ranged from six to 182, and participants’ ages from 65 to 87 years. Seven nutritional screening and assessment tools were used: the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002), the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), the MNA-short form (MNA-sf), the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), the Nutritional Risk Index (NRI), the Geriatric NRI (GNRI), and modified Nutrition Risk in the Critically ill (mNUTRIC) score. Nutritional risk was identified in 27.5% to 100% of participants. The NRS-2002, MNA, MNA-sf, NRI, and MUST demonstrated high sensitivity; the MUST had better specificity. The MNA and MUST demonstrated better criterion validity. The MNA-sf demonstrated better predictive validity for poor appetite and weight loss; the NRS-2002 demonstrated better predictive validity for prolonged hospitalization. mNUTRIC score demonstrated good predictive validity for hospital mortality. Most instruments demonstrate high sensitivity for identifying nutritional risk, but none are acknowledged as the best for nutritional screening in older adults with COVID-19.

scholarly journals Screening for Social Risk Factors: A Comparison of Two Multi‐Domain Social Risk Screening Tools

2020 ◽  
Vol 55 (S1) ◽  
pp. 138-138
Author(s):  
E. De Marchis ◽  
N. Adler ◽  
C. Clark ◽  
A. Cohen ◽  
E. Fleegler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Social Risk ◽  
Social Risk Factors ◽  
Risk Screening

Systematic review of fall risk screening tools for older patients in acute hospitals

2014 ◽  
Vol 71 (6) ◽  
pp. 1198-1209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Matarese ◽  
Dhurata Ivziku ◽  
Francesco Bartolozzi ◽  
Michela Piredda ◽  
Maria Grazia De Marinis
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Fall Risk ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Risk Screening ◽  
Acute Hospitals ◽  
Fall Risk Screening

Malnutrition screening tools in gastrointestinal cancer: A systematic review of concurrent validity

2021 ◽  
pp. 101627
Author(s):  
Irene Deftereos ◽  
Aleksandra Djordjevic ◽  
Vanessa M. Carter ◽  
Jacqueline McNamara ◽  
Justin MC. Yeung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Gastrointestinal Cancer ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Screening Tools

scholarly journals Characteristics of patients who had a stroke not initially identified during emergency prehospital assessment: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
pp. emermed-2020-209607
Author(s):  
Stephanie P Jones ◽  
Janet E Bray ◽  
Josephine ME Gibson ◽  
Graham McClelland ◽  
Colette Miller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Visual Disturbance ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
False Negatives ◽  
Presenting Symptoms ◽  
Ischaemic Attack ◽  
Stroke Type ◽  
Key Terms

BackgroundAround 25% of patients who had a stroke do not present with typical ‘face, arm, speech’ symptoms at onset, and are challenging for emergency medical services (EMS) to identify. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the characteristics of acute stroke presentations associated with inaccurate EMS identification (false negatives).MethodWe performed a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PubMed from 1995 to August 2020 using key terms: stroke, EMS, paramedics, identification and assessment. Studies included: patients who had a stroke or patient records; ≥18 years; any stroke type; prehospital assessment undertaken by health professionals including paramedics or technicians; data reported on prehospital diagnostic accuracy and/or presenting symptoms. Data were extracted and study quality assessed by two researchers using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies V.2 tool.ResultsOf 845 studies initially identified, 21 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Of the 6934 stroke and Transient Ischaemic Attack patients included, there were 1774 (26%) false negative patients (range from 4 (2%) to 247 (52%)). Commonly documented symptoms in false negative cases were speech problems (n=107; 13%–28%), nausea/vomiting (n=94; 8%–38%), dizziness (n=86; 23%–27%), changes in mental status (n=51; 8%–25%) and visual disturbance/impairment (n=43; 13%–28%).ConclusionSpeech problems and posterior circulation symptoms were the most commonly documented symptoms among stroke presentations that were not correctly identified by EMS (false negatives). However, the addition of further symptoms to stroke screening tools requires valuation of subsequent sensitivity and specificity, training needs and possible overuse of high priority resources.

scholarly journals A systematic review of validated screening tools for anxiety disorders and PTSD in low to middle income countries

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anisa Y. Mughal ◽  
Jackson Devadas ◽  
Eric Ardman ◽  
Brooke Levis ◽  
Vivian F. Go ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anxiety Disorders ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document