Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32904800›Full record

ArticleCanadian geriatrics journal : CGJ2020

Interrater Reliability of the Clinical Frailty Scale by Geriatrician and Intensivist in Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit.

Megan Surkan, Naheed Rajabali, Sean M Bagshaw, Xiaoming Wang, Darryl Rolfson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian geriatrics journal : CGJ, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Development of an Electronic Frailty Index for Hospitalized Older Adults in Sweden.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Long-term recovery after critical illness in older adults.Current opinion in critical care · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Premorbid Clinical Frailty Score and 30-day mortality among older adults in the emergency department.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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.

Megan SurkanDivision of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.
Naheed RajabaliDivision of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.
Sean M BagshawDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.
Xiaoming WangResearch Facilitation, Data Integration, Management and Reporting (DIMR), Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, AB.
Darryl RolfsonDivision of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a commonly used frailty measure in intensive care unit (ICU) settings. We are interested in the test characteristics, especially interrater reliability, of the CFS in ICU by comparing the scores of intensivists to geriatricians.

methodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study on a convenience sample of newly admitted patients to an ICU in Edmonton, Canada. An intensivist and a resident in Geriatric Medicine (GM) independently assigned a CFS score on 158 adults within 72 hours of admission. A specialist in Geriatric Medicine assigned a CFS score independently of 20 of the 158 patients to assess agreement between the two raters trained in geriatrics. Predictive validity was captured using mortality and length of stay.

resultsAgreement on CFS score was fair for intensivists vs. GM resident (kappa 0.32) and for intensivists vs. GM specialist (0.29), but substantial for GM resident vs. staff (0.79). Despite this, the CFS remained prognostically relevant, regardless of rater background. Frailty (CFS ≥ 5) as assessed by either intensivist or GM resident was a strong predictor of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 3.6; 95% CI, 1.6-8.4,

conclusionsThe interrater reliability of the CFS in ICU settings is fair for intensivists vs. geriatricians.

Indexed as

critical illnessfrailtyinterrater reliabilitymeasurement

Identifiers

PMID32904800
PMCPMC7458598

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.