Nutritional Status in Patients Undergoing Phase II Cardiac Rehabilitation by Mini Nutritional Assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Malnutrition impairs quality of life and prognosis of patients with cardiovascular disease. The Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) is a screening tool developed for the nutritional assessment of older adults. However, usefulness of MNA for patients undergoing cardiac rehabilitation (CR) has not been fully investigated. Methods: From March 2017 to September 2019, the MNA-short form (MNA-SF) and the MNA total score in patients undergoing phase II CR at the Juntendo University Hospital were evaluated. Results: A total of 336 patients (mean age 70.1 ± 11.4 years; males: 209) were analyzed. In the MNA-SF, 157 patients (47%) were found to be malnourished or at risk of malnutrition. In MNA total score, 168 patients (50%) were found to be malnourished or at risk of malnutrition. The MNA-SF < 12 group had significantly lower body mass index (BMI), hemoglobin level, low MNA scores for protein/water intake, self-evaluation of nutrition and health, and upper arm and calf circumferences compared to the MNA-SF ≥ 12 group. Assuming BMI < 18.5 as malnutrition, the sensitivity and specificity for malnutrition were 100% and 58.9% for MNA-SF, and 96.9% and 54.9% for MNA total score, respectively. Conclusions: MNA is useful in screening for malnutrition in patients undergoing CR. Approximately 50% of them were determined to be malnourished or at risk of malnutrition, suggesting the need for detailed evaluation regarding their food intake and dietary intervention.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".