Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30298168›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of frailty & aging

Implementing Frailty Measures in the Canadian Healthcare System.

D B Rolfson, G A Heckman, S M Bagshaw, D Robertson, J P Hirdes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of frailty & aging. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Redefining Frailty: Planning Care Through the Frailty Trajectory Model.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Nutritional Interventions for Early Dementia.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Successful Aging and Frailty: A Systematic Review.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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.

D B RolfsonDarryl B. Rolfson MD, Professor of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, 13-135, 11350 83 Ave., Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2P4 Canada. Email: darryl.rolfson@ualberta.ca. Tel: 780-492-6233. Fax: 780-492-2874.
G A Heckman
S M Bagshaw
D Robertson
J P Hirdes

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Canadian healthcare is changing to include individuals living with frailty, but frailty must be better operationalized and better framed by sound data standards and policy. Frailty results from deficit accumulation in multiple body systems, with exaggerated vulnerability to external stressors. A growing consensus on defining frailty sets the stage for consensus on operationalization and widespread implementation in care settings. Frailty measurement is not yet integrated into daily clinical practice in Canada. Here, we will present how this integration might occur. We hope to demonstrate that implementation must appeal to inter-professional practice needs in different settings or circumstances. In some settings, methods for frailty case finding are expected to evolve as deemed to be most appropriate to the front-line users. In this "hands-off" approach, care providers, supported by emerging knowledge translation on frailty operationalization, would be informed by their setting and local practices to establish patterns of ad hoc case finding and component definition of frailty. This more nimble case finding strategy would be opportunistic, and would appeal to expert clinicians and self-directed teams who emphasize an individualized health care experience for their patients. In other settings, we can shape frailty case finding by building care algorithms around existing standardized practices and data repositories, leading to a systematic application of frailty measures and a more coordinated process of component definition and care protocols. Here, recommended instruments and data standards must be endorsed by health networks locally, provincially and nationally. The interRAI suite of assessment instruments has pan-Canadian standards in place and its pervasiveness makes it the most obvious starting point, especially in home care and long-term care. We anticipate the evolution of an integrated model informed by stakeholders and settings, where policy makers focus on system supports for frailty case finding, while front-line clinicians use case finding strategies to pinpoint and act on key frailty components.

Indexed as

Geriatric AssessmentAgedCanadaDelivery of Health CareFrail ElderlyFrailtyHumanscase findingFrailtymeasurementstandards

Identifiers

PMID30298168
PMCPMC12275676

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.