Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://dora.health.qld.gov.au/qldresearchjspui/handle/1/11280
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSmalley, Rachaelen
dc.contributor.authorNichols, Elisabethen
dc.contributor.authorLauren Caruanaen
dc.contributor.authorScott, Meganen
dc.contributor.authorJochinke, Eliseen
dc.contributor.authorTregea, Tiffanyen
dc.contributor.authorFranklin, Natashaen
dc.date.accessioned2026-07-31T02:18:27Z-
dc.date.available2026-07-31T02:18:27Z-
dc.date.issued2026-
dc.identifier.citationNutrition & Dietetics, 2026 (83) 3 p.334-344en
dc.identifier.urihttps://dora.health.qld.gov.au/qldresearchjspui/handle/1/11280-
dc.descriptionCairns & Hinterland Hospital and Health Service (CHHHS) affiliated author: Lauren Caruanaen
dc.description.abstractAim: To describe the burden of malnutrition in an at‐risk population and validate a screening tool. Methods: A 10‐year cross‐sectional study was conducted in a remote hospital. Dietitians screened participants using the Malnutrition Screening Tool or the Adult Nutrition Tool. Participants scoring ≥2 utilising the Malnutrition Screening Tool or ≥4 utilising the Adult Nutrition Tool, or already under the care of a dietitian, were assessed for malnutrition using a Subjective Global Assessment. The validity of the Adult Nutrition Tool was compared to the Malnutrition Screening Tool in participants undergoing a Subjective Global Assessment. Results: Of 980 study participants, 70.1% identified as Aboriginal Australian and 42.6% were at risk of malnutrition. Three‐hundred and seventy‐four (58.8%) participants were malnourished. The Adult Nutrition Tool showed superior area under the curve (0.74, 95% confidence interval [0.67, 0.81], p < 0.001) than the Malnutrition Screening Tool (0.64, 95% confidence interval [0.56–0.73], p 0.001). An Adult Nutrition Tool score ≥2 demonstrated superior sensitivity (98.2%) and specificity (16.7%) compared to a Malnutrition Screening Tool score ≥2 (sensitivity 97.2% and specificity 14.3%). An Adult Nutrition Tool score of ≥3 demonstrated reduced sensitivity (92.0%) but superior specificity (20.2%) than screening scores ≥2 for both tools. Conclusion: Malnutrition risk is high in a remote Australian hospital. This study confirms the Adult Nutrition Tool and the Malnutrition Screening Tool are valid tools to predict malnutrition in a unique remote hospital, recommending an 'at‐risk' threshold of ≥2 for the Adult Nutrition Tool to aid in the early detection of malnutrition.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subjectFirst Nationsen
dc.subjectSubjective Global Assessmenten
dc.subjectmalnutrition screeningen
dc.subjectremoteen
dc.titlePersistent malnutrition in a remote Australian hospital—Insights from a 10‐year cross‐sectional studyen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/1747-0080.70073-
dc.identifier.journaltitleNutrition & Dietetics-
dc.identifier.risid31306-
dc.description.pages334-344-
dc.description.volume83-
dc.description.issue3-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairetypeJournal article-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.languageiso639-1en-
Appears in Sites:Cairns & Hinterland HHS Publications
Queensland Health Publications
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

132
checked on Sep 10, 2026

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DORA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.