Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS 2002): A New Method Based on an Analysis of Controlled Clinical Trials

Clinical Nutrition. 2003 Jun; 22(3):321-36. doi: 10.1016/s0261-5614(02)00214-5.
Kondrup, J., Rasmussen, H. H., Hamberg, O., Stanga, Z., & Ad Hoc ESPEN Working Group


Background & Aims: A system for screening of nutritional risk is described. It is based on the concept that nutritional support is indicated in patients who are severely ill with increased nutritional requirements, or who are severely undernourished, or who have certain degrees of severity of disease in combination with certain degrees of undernutrition. Degrees of severity of disease and undernutrition were defined as absent, mild, moderate or severe from data sets in a selected number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and converted to a numeric score. After completion, the screening system was validated against all published RCTs known to us of nutritional support vs spontaneous intake to investigate whether the screening system could distinguish between trials with a positive outcome and trials with no effect on outcome.

Methods: The total number of randomized trials identified was 128. In each trial, the group of patients was classified with respect to nutritional status and severity of disease, and it was determined whether the effect of nutritional intervention on clinical outcome was positive or absent.

Results: Among 75 studies of patients classified as being nutritionally at-risk, 43 showed a positive effect of nutritional support on clinical outcome. Among 53 studies of patients not considered to be nutritionally at-risk, 14 showed a positive effect (P=0.0006). This corresponded to a likelihood ratio (true positive/false positive) of 1.7 (95% CI: 2.3-1.2). For 71 studies of parenteral nutrition, the likelihood ratio was 1.4 (1.9-1.0), and for 56 studies of enteral or oral nutrition the likelihood ratio was 2.9 (5.9-1.4).

Conclusion: The screening system appears to be able to distinguish between trials with a positive effect vs no effect, and it can therefore probably also identify patients who are likely to benefit from nutritional support.

Information NutriBib

Reference work for leading, current and selected literature in the field of clinical nutrition

Publications on clinical nutrition have grown steadily in recent years and the scientific evidence has been improved by numerous observational as well as intervention studies. Various umbrella organisations, such as the Swiss Society for Clinical Nutrition (GESKES), the German Society for Nutritional Medicine (DGEM) or the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) publish guidelines on nutrition in various clinical situations at regular intervals. Thus, a large amount of literature is available for evidence-based nutritional medicine.

The NutriBib aims to filter out authoritative publications in the various fields of nutritional medicine and thus to provide an overview of the abundance of literature. A large number of experienced nutrition experts contributed to the selection of relevant sources and allow a broadly based selection. Nevertheless, the literature selection cannot be considered exhaustive. Specific literature can be found by entering search words (using the magnifying glass at the top right) or by searching the table of contents.

Is important literature still missing? We would be very pleased to hear from you:

List of abbreviations

DGEM German Society for Nutritional Medicine (German Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ernährungsmedizin)
GESKES  Swiss Society for Clinical Nutrition (German Gesellschaft für klinische Ernährung der Schweiz) 
ESPEN European Society of Clinicl Nutrition and Metabolism