MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bayesian Analysis of Modified Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (mNUTRIC) Score for Mortality Prediction in Critically Ill Patients

2025· article· en· W4410188239 on OpenAlexaff
Raj Kumar, Archana Kumari, Vivek Verma, Jay Prakash, Pradip Bhattacharya, Shio Priye, Khushboo Saran, Kunal Raj, Bram Rochwerg

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Critical Care Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCritically illMedicineIntensive care medicineCritical illnessBayesian probabilityStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and aims: Malnutrition has a considerable influence on critically ill patients by increasing mortality and poorer clinical outcomes. The modified Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (mNUTRIC) score is commonly used to assess nutritional risk and predict death; however, its sensitivity, specificity, and optimal cut-off values differ between studies. This study uses a Bayesian approach to assess the accuracy of the mNUTRIC score in predicting mortality in critically ill patients. Patients and methods: A preplanned Bayesian analysis was performed using data from 31 cohort studies, which included 13,271 intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The study investigated the mNUTRIC score's sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, and area under the curve (AUC). Subgroup analysis compared mortality rates at 28-day, 90-day, and in-hospital time points, along with cut-off values (<5 vs ≥5). Bayesian modeling was performed using the rjags and brms packages in R version 3.2.1. These tools also facilitated the visualization of results, including posterior distributions, forest plots, and Fagan nomograms. Results: Bayesian analysis affirmed the mNUTRIC score's high discriminative capacity, with a pooled sensitivity of 0.84 (95% credible interval (CrI): 0.80-0.88), specificity of 0.77 (95% CrI: 0.73-0.80), and AUC of 0.88 (95% CrI: 0.83-0.92). A cut-off of <5 resulted in higher sensitivity (0.83) and AUC (0.87), whereas ≥5 remained accurate but had somewhat lower sensitivity. The score consistently predicted 28-day, 90-day, and in-hospital mortality. Conclusions: The Bayesian analysis validates the mNUTRIC score as a reliable predictor of mortality in critically ill patients. Its excellent diagnostic performance suggests its incorporation into ICU for early risk assessment and nutritional interventions. How to cite this article: . Bayesian Analysis of Modified Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (mNUTRIC) Score for Mortality Prediction in Critically Ill Patients. Indian J Crit Care Med 2025;29(5):449-457.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.346 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndian Journal of Critical Care MedicineSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207