Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25916552›Full record

ArticleBone2015

Comparison between frailty index of deficit accumulation and fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) in prediction of risk of fractures.

Guowei Li, Lehana Thabane, Alexandra Papaioannou, Jonathan D Adachi

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Bone, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03824106 (Frailty Rehabilitation), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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.

NCT03824106 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Frailty Rehabilitation: A Community-based Intervention to Promote Healthy Aging

TypeinterventionalSponsorMcMaster UniversityRan2022 to 2025Enrolled324ConditionsFrailtyArmsControl, Group Exercise, Nutrition and Medication review, Protein Supplement, Vitamin D
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Frailty Change and Major Osteoporotic Fracture in the Elderly: Data from the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women 3-Year Hamilton Cohort.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2016
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Development and validation of common data model-based fracture prediction model using machine learning algorithm.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Mortality, Falls, and Fracture Risk Are Positively Associated With Frailty: A SIDIAP Cohort Study of 890 000 Patients.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2022
    Article
  7. Risk Factors of Frailty in Patients with Distal Radius Fractures.Geriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Progression of frailty and prevalence of osteoporosis in a community cohort of older women-a 10-year longitudinal study.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2018
    Article
  12. Article
  13. An overview of osteoporosis and frailty in the elderly.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2017
    Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Guowei LiDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8, Canada. Electronic address: lig28@mcmaster.ca.
Lehana ThabaneDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8, Canada; St. Joseph's Hospital, McMaster University, 25 Charlton Avenue East, Hamilton, ON L8N 1Y2, Canada. Electronic address: thabanl@mcmaster.ca.
Alexandra PapaioannouDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8, Canada. Electronic address: papaioannou@hhsc.ca.
Jonathan D AdachiSt. Joseph's Hospital, McMaster University, 25 Charlton Avenue East, Hamilton, ON L8N 1Y2, Canada; Department of Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8, Canada. Electronic address: jd.adachi@sympatico.ca.
McMaster University · CASt. Joseph's Hospital · CA

Funding

CIHR 88225-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A frailty index (FI) of deficit accumulation could quantify and predict the risk of fractures based on the degree of frailty in the elderly. We aimed to compare the predictive powers between the FI and the fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) in predicting risk of major osteoporotic fracture (hip, upper arm or shoulder, spine, or wrist) and hip fracture, using the data from the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW) 3-year Hamilton cohort. There were 3985 women included in the study, with the mean age of 69.4 years (standard deviation [SD] = 8.89). During the follow-up, there were 149 (3.98%) incident major osteoporotic fractures and 18 (0.48%) hip fractures reported. The FRAX and FI were significantly related to each other. Both FRAX and FI significantly predicted risk of major osteoporotic fracture, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.05) and 1.02 (95% CI: 1.01-1.04) for per-0.01 increment for the FRAX and FI respectively. The HRs were 1.37 (95% CI: 1.19-1.58) and 1.26 (95% CI: 1.12-1.42) for an increase of per-0.10 (approximately one SD) in the FRAX and FI respectively. Similar discriminative ability of the models was found: c-index = 0.62 for the FRAX and c-index = 0.61 for the FI. When cut-points were chosen to trichotomize participants into low-risk, medium-risk and high-risk groups, a significant increase in fracture risk was found in the high-risk group (HR = 2.04, 95% CI: 1.36-3.07) but not in the medium-risk group (HR = 1.23, 95% CI: 0.82-1.84) compared with the low-risk women for the FI, while for FRAX the medium-risk (HR = 2.00, 95% CI: 1.09-3.68) and high-risk groups (HR = 2.61, 95% CI: 1.48-4.58) predicted risk of major osteoporotic fracture significantly only when survival time exceeded 18months (550 days). Similar findings were observed for hip fracture and in sensitivity analyses. In conclusion, the FI is comparable with FRAX in the prediction of risk of future fractures, indicating that measures of frailty status may aid in fracture risk assessment and fracture prevention in the elderly. Further evidence from randomized controlled trials of osteoporosis medication interventions is needed to support the FI and FRAX as validated measures of fracture risk.

Indexed as

Frail ElderlyAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFractures, BoneGeriatric AssessmentHumansLongitudinal StudiesRisk FactorsFrailty indexFRAXGLOWHip fractureMajor osteoporotic fracturePredictive power

Identifiers

PMID25916552
PMCPMC5104554
OpenAlexW1988907452

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.