Comparison of two nutritional assessment methods in gastroenterology patients

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 16, Issue 16

This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

All Articles published online

Item

Count

PDF

347

HTML

2821

Tables (1-6)

173

Sum=3341

Apr 28, 2010 (publication date) through Jul 22, 2024

Times Cited of This Article

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Gastroenterology

ISSN

1007-9327

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Brief Article

World J Gastroenterol. Apr 28, 2010; 16(16): 1999-2004
Published online Apr 28, 2010. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v16.i16.1999

Table 1 Distribution of nutritional status upon admittance according to the gastrointestinal diagnosis observed by SGA and NRI

Nourishment status/diagnosis	SGA assessment¹		NRI assessment²
Nourishment status/diagnosis	Well	Malnourished	Well	Malnourished
Benign	140	76	90	126
Malignant	23	60	18	65
Total	163	136	108	191

¹χ² = 46.24, DF = 1, P < 0.001;

²Cochrans κ index = 0.367; P < 0.001. SGA: Subjective global assessment; NRI: Nutritional risk index.

Citation: Filipović BF, Gajić M, Milinić N, Milovanović B, Filipović BR, Cvetković M, Šibalić N. Comparison of two nutritional assessment methods in gastroenterology patients. World J Gastroenterol 2010; 16(16): 1999-2004
URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v16/i16/1999.htm
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v16.i16.1999