Picture of UK Houses of Parliament

Leading national thinking on politics, government & public policy through Open Access research

Strathprints makes available scholarly Open Access content by researchers in the School of Government & Public Policy, based within the Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences.

Research here is 1st in Scotland for research intensity and spans a wide range of domains. The Department of Politics demonstrates expertise in understanding parties, elections and public opinion, with additional emphases on political economy, institutions and international relations. This international angle is reflected in the European Policies Research Centre (EPRC) which conducts comparative research on public policy. Meanwhile, the Centre for Energy Policy provides independent expertise on energy, working across multidisciplinary groups to shape policy for a low carbon economy.

Explore the Open Access research of the School of Government & Public Policy. Or explore all of Strathclyde's Open Access research...

A local nutritional screening tool compared to malnutrition universal screening tool

Gerasimidis, K and Drongitis, P and Murray, L and Young, D and McKee, R F (2007) A local nutritional screening tool compared to malnutrition universal screening tool. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 61 (7). pp. 916-921. ISSN 0954-3007

Full text not available in this repository.Request a copy from the Strathclyde author

Abstract

Objective:The aim of the study was to compare the Glasgow Nutritional Screening Tool with the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) recently recommended for use by the British Association for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. Design: Comparison-validation study. Setting: Four adult acute hospitals in Glasgow, UK. Subjects: All 242 in-patients from a variety of specialties. Methods: Two investigators independently interviewed 202 in-patients for the comparison-validation study. Each used a single tool with each patient, using each tool in turn. Investigators were not aware of each other's assessments. Forty other patients were interviewed by both raters separately using the local tool to evaluate inter-rater reliability. Results: When compared with MUST as a 'gold standard', the local tool had a sensitivity of 95.3% and a specificity of 64.9%, with moderate agreement between the two tools using kappa test (κ=0.57). Agreement between the raters was substantial (κ=0.69) with 85% of patients classified the same by both raters. Conclusion: The Glasgow Nutritional Screening Tool is a valid and reliable tool that can be used on admission for nutritional screening.