Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

The GLIM consensus approach to diagnosis of malnutrition: A 5-year update

Tommy Cederholm (First author), Gordon Jensen, Maria Isabel Correia, Maria Cristina Gonzalez, Ryoji Fukushima, Veeradej Pisprasert, Renee Blaauw, Diana Cardenaz Braz, Fernando Carrasco, Alfonso Cruz Jentoft, Cristina Cuerda, David Evans, Vanessa Fuchs-Tarlovsky, Leah Gramlich, Han Ping Shi, Jeanette Hasse, Michael Hiesmeyer, Naoki Hiki, Harriët Jager-Wittenaar, Shukri JahitAnayanet Jaquez, Heather Keller, Stanislaw Klek, Ainsley Malone, Kris Mogensen, Naoharu Mori, Manpreet Mundi, Maurizio Muscaritoli, Doris Ng, Ibolya Nyulasi, Matthias Pirlich, Stéphane Schneider, Marian de van der Schueren, Soranit Siltharm, Pierre Singer, Alison Steiber, Kelly Tappenden, Ianchun Yu, Andre van Gossum, Jaw-Yuan Wang, Marion Winkler, Rocco Barazzoni, Charlene Compher

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Background
The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) introduced an approach for malnutrition diagnosis in 2019 comprised of screening followed by assessment of three phenotypic criteria: weight loss, low BMI, and low muscle mass, and two etiologic criteria: reduced food intake/assimilation, and inflammation/disease burden. This planned update reconsiders the GLIM framework based on published knowledge and experience over the past five years.
Methods
A GLIM working group (n = 43 members) conducted a literature search spanning 2019–2024 using the keywords “Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition or GLIM”. Prior GLIM activities providing guidance for use of the criteria on muscle mass and inflammation were reviewed. Successive rounds of review and revision were used to achieve consensus.
Results
More than 400 scientific reports are published in peer-reviewed journals, forming the basis of 10 systematic reviews, some including meta-analyses of GLIM validity that indicate strong construct and predictive validity. Limitations and future priorities are discussed. Working group findings suggest that assessment of low muscle mass should be guided by experience and available technological resources. Clinical judgement may suffice to evaluate the inflammation/disease burden etiologic criterion. No revisions of the weight loss, low BMI, or reduced food intake/assimilation criteria are suggested. Following two rounds of review and revision, the working group secured 100 % agreement with the conclusions reported in the 5-year update.
Conclusion
Ongoing initiatives target priorities that include malnutrition risk screening procedures, GLIM adaptation to the intensive care setting, assessment in support of the reduced food intake/assimilation criterion, and determination of malnutrition in obesity.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)11-20
Number of pages10
JournalClinical Nutrition
Volume49
Early online date5 Apr 2025
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2025

Keywords

  • assessment
  • inflammation
  • malnutrition
  • muscle
  • screening

Research Focus Areas Hanze University of Applied Sciences * (mandatory by Hanze)

  • Healthy Ageing

Research Focus Areas Research Centre or Centre of Expertise * (mandatory by Hanze)

  • Frailty and adequate care

Publinova themes

  • Other
  • Health

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The GLIM consensus approach to diagnosis of malnutrition: A 5-year update'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this