ArticleGeriatrics (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Feasibility and Process Evaluation of a Screening Intervention for Early Detection of Malnutrition Risk Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults Receiving Home Care Services.
Article in Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMalnutrition is prevalent among older adults (OAs), ≥65 years, receiving home care services. Despite recommendations for early detection and multifactorial interventions, a gap remains between routine practice and evidence. We therefore developed a complex intervention for early detection of malnutrition risk in a Danish home care setting, comprising an implementation strategy with staff learning activities and a screening procedure with a start-up conversation and follow-up screenings. This article outlines the feasibility test and process evaluation of the intervention.
methodsGuided by the Medical Research Council (MRC/NIHR) framework for complex interventions and MRC process evaluation guidance, the evaluation was conducted in two parts. Part 1 focused on case-level feasibility, while Part 2 examined implementation feasibility within routine home care practice. Qualitative data were collected through participant observations, informal interviews, semi-structured individual interviews, focus group interviews, and a participatory workshop. Quantitative data were extracted from the electronic patient record (NEXUS, Systematic A/S, Aarhus, Denmark). Qualitative data were analysed using qualitative content analysis, and quantitative data using descriptive statistics.
resultsAll eligible OAs (12/12) received a start-up conversation in Part 1 compared with 5/16 (31%) in Part 2, while follow-up screenings declined from 61/71 (86%) to 37/50 (74%). Overall, staff perceived the learning activities as useful and were able to deliver the screening procedure. However, delivery and implementation were influenced by time constraints, leadership support, workplace culture, and organisational infrastructures. OAs showed willingness to participate, yet their prerequisites for engagement were more limited than anticipated.
conclusionThe intervention could be delivered in a real-world home care setting, but delivery, implementation, and activation of proposed mechanisms were constrained by resource limitations, competing priorities, workplace culture, and organisational infrastructures. To improve uptake, intervention adaptations and a stepwise implementation approach are recommended.
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.