Surveys in high-income countries show that inadequacies and deficiencies can be common for some nutrients, particularly in vulnerable subgroups of the population. Inadequate intakes, high requirements for rapid growth and development, or age- or disease-related impairments in nutrient intake, digestion, absorption, or increased nutrient losses can lead to micronutrient deficiencies. The consequent subclinical conditions are difficult to recognize if not screened for and often go unnoticed. Nutrient deficiencies can be persistent despite primary nutrition interventions that are aimed at improving dietary intakes. Secondary prevention that targets groups at high risk of inadequacy or deficiency, such as in the primary care setting, can be a useful complementary approach to address persistent nutritional gaps. However, this strategy is often underestimated and overlooked as potentially cost-effective means to prevent future health care costs and to improve the health and quality of life of individuals. In this paper, the authors discuss key appraisal criteria to consider when evaluating the benefits and disadvantages of a secondary prevention of nutrient deficiencies through screening.
Keywords: biomarkers; cost-effectiveness; nutrient inadequacies and deficiencies; nutrition screening; nutritional supplements; public health.