ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2025
Comparison of Body Mass Index Range Criteria and Their Association with Nutrition-Related Risk: A Cross-Sectional Study in Polish Older Adults.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dietary Intake Among Community-Dwelling Adults Aged 55 Years and Older in the Central Division, Fiji.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Nutritional Status, Body Composition, and Frailty in Community-Dwelling and Institutionalized Albanian Older Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.Nutrients · 2026Observational
- Evaluation of Nutritional Status in Geriatric Patients Before and After the Insertion of Complete Dentures.Cureus · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND The use of appropriate reference values for body mass index (BMI) indicators in the elderly population is crucial when assessing the risk of malnutrition. The aim of the present study was to compare the distribution of BMI according to the ranges proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Committee on Diet and Health (CDH), and to examine their correlation with nutrition-related risk as assessed by the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) in older adults. MATERIAL AND METHODS The study involved 185 patients hospitalized in the geriatric ward. Anthropometric measurements were performed in accordance with the applicable standards. GNRI was calculated to assess the risk of mortality and morbidity related to malnutrition. RESULTS The no nutrition-related risk group had a median BMI of 28.5 kg/m, while the nutrition-related risk group showed a significantly lower median BMI of 22.8 kg/m² (P<0.0001). Under CDH BMI criteria, 75% of underweight participants had a nutrition-related risk, compared with 6.3% under WHO criteria. Among those with normal weight, 81.3% (WHO) and 22.9% (CDH) were at risk. For excess body weight, the risk was 12.5% (WHO) and 2.1% (CDH). CONCLUSIONS This study highlights significant discrepancies between BMI classification systems by WHO and CDH for older adults. WHO criteria may underestimate underweight cases and overestimate excess body weight. CDH, being more sensitive to underweight detection and strongly correlated with GNRI-based risks, proves more effective for assessing nutritional status. Tailored BMI guidelines for older adults are essential for accurate health assessments and improved care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.