Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30342479›Full record

SynthesisBMC geriatrics2018

Interventions for frail community-dwelling older adults have no significant effect on adverse outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Michael Van der Elst, Birgitte Schoenmakers, Daan Duppen, Deborah Lambotte, Bram Fret, Bert Vaes, Jan De Lepeleire, D-SCOPE Consortium

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC geriatrics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. [PAPPS GdT Major 2020 Update].Atencion primaria · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

8 authors.

Michael Van der ElstDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33 bus 7001, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium. michael.vanderelst@kuleuven.be.
Birgitte SchoenmakersDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33 bus 7001, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Daan DuppenDepartment of Educational Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, B-1050, Brussels, Belgium.
Deborah LambotteDepartment of Educational Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, B-1050, Brussels, Belgium.
Bram FretDepartment of Educational Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, B-1050, Brussels, Belgium.
Bert VaesDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33 bus 7001, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Jan De LepeleireDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33 bus 7001, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium.
D-SCOPE Consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccording to some studies, interventions can prevent or delay frailty, but their effect in preventing adverse outcomes in frail community-dwelling older people is unclear. The aim is to investigate the effect of an intervention on adverse outcomes in frail older adults.

methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Social Sciences Citation Index. Randomized controlled studies that aimed to treat frail community-dwelling older adults, were included. The outcomes were mortality, hospitalization, formal health costs, accidental falls, and institutionalization. Several sub-analyses were performed (duration of intervention, average age, dimension, recruitment).

resultsTwenty-five articles (16 original studies) were included. Six types of interventions were found. The pooled odds ratios (OR) for mortality when allocated in the experimental group were 0.99 [95% CI: 0.79, 1.25] for case management and 0.78 [95% CI: 0.41, 1.45] for provision information intervention. For institutionalization, the pooled OR with case management was 0.92 [95% CI: 0.63, 1.32], and the pooled OR for information provision intervention was 1.53 [95% CI: 0.64, 3.65]. The pooled OR for hospitalization when allocated in the experimental group was 1.13 [95% CI: 0.95, 1.35] for case management. Further sub-analyses did not yield any significant findings.

conclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis does not provide sufficient scientific evidence that interventions by frail older adults can be protective against the included adverse outcomes. A sub-analysis for some variables yielded no significant effects, although some findings suggested a decrease in adverse outcomes.

trial registrationProspero registration CRD42016035429 .

Indexed as

Frail ElderlyAccidental FallsAgedAged, 80 and overCase ManagementEarly Medical InterventionFrailtyHealth Care CostsHospitalizationHumansIndependent LivingInstitutionalizationTreatment OutcomeFrailty - Intervention - Community-dwelling - RCT - Review - Older adults

Identifiers

PMID30342479
PMCPMC6195949

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.