Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23786540›Full record

ReviewBMC geriatrics2013

Measures of frailty in population-based studies: an overview.

Kim Bouillon, Mika Kivimaki, Mark Hamer, Severine Sabia, Eleonor I Fransson, Archana Singh-Manoux, Catharine R Gale, G David Batty

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in BMC geriatrics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 210 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
210citing papers in PubMed, 15 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03425227 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Frailty Level Monitoring and Analysis After a Pilot Six-week Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Using FRED Exergame Including Biofeeback Supervision

TypeinterventionalSponsorBegoña Garcia ZapirainRan2016 to 2016Enrolled65ConditionsFRAILTYArmsFRED EXERGAME
NCT03955302 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Ultrasound Assessment of Muscle Architecture Before and After the Implementation of a Physical Exercise Regime in the Water in a Frail Elderly Population

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ValenciaRan2018 to 2019Enrolled41ConditionsFrailty SyndromeArmsExercise
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

210 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

150 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Kim BouillonDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK. kim.bouillon.09@ucl.ac.uk
Mika Kivimaki
Mark Hamer
Severine Sabia
Eleonor I Fransson
Archana Singh-Manoux
Catharine R Gale
G David Batty

Funding

Socioeconomic gradient in CHD in early old ageR01HL036310 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF LONDON · PI KIVIMAKI, MIKA J, MARMOT, MICHAEL G · 1986 to 2012
$3.1M
Health behaviors over the adult lifecourse and cognitive agingR01AG034454 · NIA · UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON · PI KIVIMAKI, MIKA J, SINGH-MANOUX, ARCHANA · 2009 to 2013
$1.5M
British Heart Foundation RG/13/2/30098Medical Research Council MC_UP_A620_1015Medical Research Council MC_UU_12011/2Medical Research Council MR/K026992/1NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL036310NIA NIH HHS R01 AG034454Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough research productivity in the field of frailty has risen exponentially in recent years, there remains a lack of consensus regarding the measurement of this syndrome. This overview offers three services: first, we provide a comprehensive catalogue of current frailty measures; second, we evaluate their reliability and validity; third, we report on their popularity of use.

methodsIn order to identify relevant publications, we searched MEDLINE (from its inception in 1948 to May 2011); scrutinized the reference sections of the retrieved articles; and consulted our own files. An indicator of the frequency of use of each frailty instrument was based on the number of times it had been utilized by investigators other than the originators.

resultsOf the initially retrieved 2,166 papers, 27 original articles described separate frailty scales. The number (range: 1 to 38) and type of items (range of domains: physical functioning, disability, disease, sensory impairment, cognition, nutrition, mood, and social support) included in the frailty instruments varied widely. Reliability and validity had been examined in only 26% (7/27) of the instruments. The predictive validity of these scales for mortality varied: for instance, hazard ratios/odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for mortality risk for frail relative to non-frail people ranged from 1.21 (0.78; 1.87) to 6.03 (3.00; 12.08) for the Phenotype of Frailty and 1.57 (1.41; 1.74) to 10.53 (7.06; 15.70) for the Frailty Index. Among the 150 papers which we found to have used at least one of the 27 frailty instruments, 69% (n = 104) reported on the Phenotype of Frailty, 12% (n = 18) on the Frailty Index, and 19% (n = 28) on one of the remaining 25 instruments.

conclusionsAlthough there are numerous frailty scales currently in use, reliability and validity have rarely been examined. The most evaluated and frequently used measure is the Phenotype of Frailty.

Indexed as

Frail ElderlyAged, 80 and overDatabases, FactualHumansPopulation SurveillanceReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID23786540
PMCPMC3710231

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.