Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25608946›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2015

"It's MAGIC"--development of a manageable geriatric assessment for general practice use.

Tanja Barkhausen, Ulrike Junius-Walker, Eva Hummers-Pradier, Christiane A Mueller, Gudrun Theile

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Frailty in anesthesia.Current opinion in anaesthesiology · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Impact of Hearing Loss on Geriatric Assessment.Clinical interventions in aging · 2020
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Tanja BarkhausenInstitute for General Practice, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Strasse 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany. barkhausen.tanja@mh-hannover.de.
Ulrike Junius-WalkerInstitute for General Practice, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Strasse 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany. junius-walker.ulrike@mh-hannover.de.
Eva Hummers-PradierDepartment of General Practice, University Medical Centre Goettingen, Humboldtallee 38, 37073, Goettingen, Germany. eva.hummers-pradier@med.uni-goettingen.de.
Christiane A MuellerDepartment of General Practice, University Medical Centre Goettingen, Humboldtallee 38, 37073, Goettingen, Germany. christiane.mueller@med.uni-goettingen.de.
Gudrun TheileInstitute for General Practice, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Strasse 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany. gudrun.theile@hotmail.de.
Medizinische Hochschule Hannover · DEUniversity of Göttingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGeriatric assessments are established tools in institutional care since they enable standardized detection of relevant age-related disorders. Geriatric assessments could also be helpful in general practice. However, they are infrequently used in this setting, mainly due to their lengthy administration. The aim of the study was the development of a "manageable geriatric assessment--MAGIC", specially tailored to the requirements of daily primary care.

methodsMAGIC was developed based on the comprehensive Standardized Assessment for Elderly People in Primary Care (STEP), using four different methodological approaches: We relied on A) the results of the PRISCUS study by assessing the prevalence of health problems uncovered by STEP, the importance of the respective problems rated by patients and general practitioners, as well as the treatment procedures initiated subsequently to the assessment. Moreover, we included findings of B) a literature analysis C) a review of the STEP assessment by experienced general practitioners and D) focus groups with general practitioners.

resultsThe newly created MAGIC assessment consists of 9 items and covers typical geriatric health problems and syndromes: function, falls, incontinence, cognitive impairment, impaired ears and eyes, vaccine coverage, emotional instability and isolation.

conclusionsMAGIC promises to be a helpful screening instrument in primary care consultations involving elderly multimorbid patients. Applicable within a minimum of time it still covers health problems highly relevant with regard to a potential loss of autonomy. Feasibility will be tested in the context of a large, still ongoing randomized controlled trial on "reduction of potentially inadequate medication in elderly patients" (RIME study; DRKS-ID: DRKS00003610) in general practice.

Indexed as

General PracticeAccidental FallsActivities of Daily LivingAged, 80 and overDepressionFocus GroupsGeriatric AssessmentHumansImmunizationSurveys and QuestionnairesUrinary IncontinenceVision Disorders

Identifiers

PMID25608946
PMCPMC4320637
OpenAlexW2038997961

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.