ReviewCanadian geriatrics journal : CGJ2021
Understanding Frailty Screening: a Domain Mapping Exercise.
Review in Canadian geriatrics journal : CGJ, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comprehensive geriatric assessment delivered by advanced nursing practitioners within primary care setting: a mixed-methods pilot feasibility randomised controlled trial.BMC geriatrics · 2023Trial
- Molecular predictors of incident frailty: a systematic review and critical appraisal of longitudinal evidence.GeroScience · 2026Review
- Doctors' and Pharmacists' knowledge, skills, and perception of mental frailty in older adults: a scoping review.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Beyond chronological age: frailty, vitality, and subjective health structured by psychological segmentation in older adults.Frontiers in aging · 2026Article
- Article
- Validation of the nurse directed frailty assessment tool, to identify patients at risk of emergency department visits, hospitalisation, and 1-year all-cause mortality.European geriatric medicine · 2025Article
- Mapping a comprehensive assessment tool to a holistic definition of health for person-centred care planning in home care: a modified eDelphi study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Development of a Frailty Ladder Using Rasch Analysis: If the Shoe Fits.Canadian geriatrics journal : CGJ · 2023Article
- Inter-rater reliability of the Clinical Frailty Scale by staff members in a Swedish emergency department setting.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany definitions and operationalisations of frailty exclude psychosocial factors, such as social isolation and mental health, despite considerable evidence of the links between frailty and these factors. This study aimed to investigate the health domains covered by frailty screening tools.
methodsA systematic search of the literature was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycInfo were searched from inception to December 31, 2018. Data related to the domains of each screening tool were extracted and mapped onto a framework based on the biopsychosocial model of Lehmans
resultsSixty-seven frailty screening tools were captured in 79 articles. All screening tools assessed biological factors, 73% assessed psychological factors, 52% assessed social factors, and 78% assessed contextual factors. Under half (43%) of the tools evaluated all four domains, 33% evaluated three of four domains, 12% reported two of four domains, and 13% reported one domain (biological).
conclusionThis review found considerable variation in the assessment domains covered by frailty screening tools. Frailty is a broad construct, and frailty screening tools need to cover a wide variety of domains to enhance screening and outcomes assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.