Guiding framework for clinical nutrition research

Carliene van Dronkelaar, Maarten Soeters, Philipp Schuetz, Carla Prado, Nicole Kiss, Michael Tieland, Hinke Kruizenga. A holistic perspective on malnutrition in older adults: towards an integrated clinical nutrition research guiding framework. Clinical Nutrition, 2026

Complexity of malnutrition and research

Malnutrition arises from an interplay of factors: reduced dietary intake, impaired nutrient absorption, increased requirements due to illness, and psychosocial and functional problems. Direct causes include, for example, chewing difficulties, poor appetite, swallowing problems, and malabsorption. Indirect factors include loneliness, pain, cognitive decline, and limited mobility. This complexity makes the development of effective interventions and the conduct of robust research challenging.

Traditional malnutrition research is often limited by:

  • Unidimensional interventions (e.g. nutrition supplements only)

  • Heterogeneous study designs

  • Variable outcome measures

  • Limited feasibility of classical RCTs in everyday clinical practice

Experience and lessons learned consolidated into a research framework

Carliene van Dronkelaar conducted the ProIntens study: a large-scale clinical trial investigating the effectiveness of a combined nutrition and physical activity intervention, carried out in five hospitals in Amsterdam. During the implementation of this study, several barriers were encountered, including the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. These challenges were not unique to ProIntens but are recognizable across many large-scale clinical nutrition studies.

Therefore, as the final chapter of her PhD thesis, she co-authored a perspective paper together with international experts experienced in large-scale clinical nutrition research. In this paper, the lessons learned were translated into a framework for future clinical nutrition research. This framework aims to improve the development, implementation, and evaluation of interventions, and to facilitate their translation into clinical practice.

The framework is based on insights from a range of large and smaller studies. Key lessons include:

  • Multidisciplinary, personalized nutrition care improves outcomes, but implementation is challenging.
  • Early and structured involvement of all stakeholders is essential.
  • Flexible study designs and digital tools can enhance feasibility and relevance.
  • Long-term follow-up is needed to assess sustainable effects.

Future directions, recommendations, and conclusion

The authors advocate an integrated, interdisciplinary approach to malnutrition in older adults, with attention to both effectiveness and real-world feasibility. The proposed framework provides practical guidance for future research and has the potential to contribute to improved care and outcomes for vulnerable patients.

By applying this framework, researchers, healthcare professionals, and policymakers can work together to develop more effective and more easily implementable nutrition interventions for older adults and other vulnerable populations. This may lead to improved quality of life, greater independence, and lower healthcare costs.

Authors of this article

Carliene van Dronkelaar MSc

Carliene van Dronkelaar MSc

Researcher

Nivel and Amsterdam UMC, ProIntens study

dr.ir. Hinke Kruizenga

dr.ir. Hinke Kruizenga

Associate professor Nutrition & Dietetics

dr. Maarten Soeters

dr. Maarten Soeters

internist-endocrinologist

Amsterdam UMC

Prof. dr. Philip Schuetz

Prof. dr. Philip Schuetz

Head of the University Medical Clinic & Department Head of Medicine and Endocrinology

Kantonsspital Aarau, Switserland, EFFORT study

Prof.dr. Carla Prado

Prof.dr. Carla Prado

Professor in Nutrition, Body composition and Energy metabolism

University of Alberta, Canada PRIMe study

Prof. dr. Nicole Kiss

Prof. dr. Nicole Kiss

Professor in Dietetics

Deakin University, Australia, Pilot in 2016 en PREDICT study

dr. Michael Tieland

dr. Michael Tieland

Associate professor Nutrition Sciences

Deakin university, Australia, ProIntens study

Studies underpinning this framework

The development of this framework is based on multiple studies and on the research experience of the authors involved in these studies. The table below provides an overview of the main characteristics and findings that underpin the framework. A detailed description of the contribution of each study can be found in the appendix of the article.

Taken together, these studies illustrate the opportunities and challenges of nutrition research, particularly in clinically vulnerable patients and older adults, and highlight why a structured yet flexible approach is necessary.

Study

Population

Design

Key contribution

Link to framework

Cochrane review (Baldwin et al. 2021)

94 RCTs (10,284 patients)

Systematic Review

Showed that most trials were small, heterogeneous, with diverse interventions and outcomes; advocated for stratification, core outcome sets, longer follow-up, and digital tools for adherence

Step 1 (design)

Step 3 (outcomes)

ProIntens trial (van Dronkelaar et al. 2025)

Hospitalized older patients at risk of malnutrition

Multicentre RCT

Experienced recruitment difficulties and attrition; rigid RCT design limited flexibility; behavioural change targeted patients more than environment or staff; limited multidisciplinary involvement due to funding constraints

Step 1 (design)

Step 2 (treatment delivery)

Step 3 (outcomes)

EFFORT trial (Schuetz et al. 2019)

2088 hospitalized older patients

Pragmatic RCT

Demonstrated possibilities of pragmatic trials with a treatment algorithm, large sample size and composite outcome

Step 1 (design)

Step 2 (treatment delivery)

Step 3 (outcomes)

NOURISH trial (Deutz et al. 2016)

652 older patients with malnutrition

Double-blind, placebo-controlled RCT

Clear delivery but high exclusion (≈60%) due to comorbidities, limiting generalizability and flexibility to patient needs

Step 1 (design)

Step 2 (delivery)

 

PRIMe trial (Ford et al. 2024)

Colorectal patients undergoing chemotherapy

Open-label pilot RCT

Recruitment challenges and high attrition; rigid RCT design and high patient burden limited feasibility; late involvement of stakeholders

Start (co-design)

Step 1 (design)

Step 2 (treatment delivery)

Lung cancer trial (Kiss et al. 2016)

Lung cancer patients undergoing (chemo)radiotherapy

Pilot RCT

Individualised counselling feasible and valued by patients but recruitment difficult (timing at diagnosis, high palliative proportion, 37% attrition)

Start (co-design)

Step 1 (design)

Step 3 (outcomes)

 

PREDICT trial (Kiss et al. 2024)

Lung cancer patients undergoing (chemo)radiotherapy

Observational

Recruitment <50% of planned sample due to COVID; high burden of measurements led to non-adherence; highlighted feasibility challenges in real-world data collection

Step 1 (design)

Step 3 (outcomes)