. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2024 Nov 1.

Published in final edited form as: J Ren Nutr. 2023 Apr 27;33(6):707–716. doi: 10.1053/j.jrn.2023.04.002

Table 1.

Potential Drawbacks of Conventional Malnutrition Assessment Tools

Drawback	Description	Example

Redundancy	Multiple scoring criteria measuring similar aspects of malnutrition	AND/A.S.P.E.N. tool has three separate scoring criteria for assessing nutrition status (physical exams of subcutaneous fat and muscle, function tests)¹⁸
Inconsistency	Scoring criterion with multiple measurement parameters from different aspects of malnutrition	ISRNM tool weight scoring criterion includes indicators of nutrient balance (weight loss), and nutrition stores (weight status)¹³
Weighting	Number (proportion) of scoring criteria that include indicators of nutrient balance, nutrition status and malnutrition risk	Fewer scoring criteria for nutrient balance (2/10) than nutrition status and malnutrition risk (4/10 each) in MIS tool²¹
Scoring	Malnutrition assessed based on sum of scoring criteria (often unweighted)	AND/A.S.P.E.N. tool diagnosis of malnutrition based on 2/6 scoring criteria¹⁸

AND, academy of nutrition and dietetics; A.S.P.E.N., American Society for parenteral and enteral nutrition; ISRNM, International society of renal nutrition and metabolism; MIS, malnutrition inflammation score.