We performed a descriptive analysis of the data using absolute frequencies and percentages or mean and standard deviation (SD) or median and interquartile range (IQR). We verified the normality of the distribution using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Patients with normal and impaired nutritional status were compared using the Pearson χ2 test for qualitative variables and the t test for quantitative variables, as applicable.
We ran two multivariate models, one based on logistic regression to investigate the variables that were independently associated with impaired nutritional status (MNA ≤ 11 points) and another based on linear regression for the dependent variable MNA (0–14 points). The model included all the variables that proved to be significant in the bivariate analysis and those that were of clinical interest. Given an alpha risk of 0.10 and a beta risk of 0.2 in a bilateral contrast, the sample size calculation showed that 72 patients were necessary to detect an expected significant difference in perceived QoL, where patients with a normal body weight scored higher than those who were at risk of malnutrition [4 (link)]. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. All the statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 28 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).
Free full text: Click here