Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34535074›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2021

Reproducibility and responsiveness of the Frailty Index and Frailty Phenotype in older hospitalized patients.

Marlies Feenstra, Frederike M M Oud, Carolien J Jansen, Nynke Smidt, Barbara C van Munster, Sophia E de Rooij

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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.

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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Application of Pragmatic Criteria to Assessments of Frailty and Physical Function Among People With HIV.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Short-term Frailty Index Fluctuations in Older Adults: Noise or Signal?The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Reliability of the Frailty Index Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marlies Feenstra *Department of Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, PO Box 30001, HPC: AA43, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands. m.feenstra01@umcg.nl.
Frederike M M Oud *Department of Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, PO Box 30001, HPC: AA43, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Carolien J JansenDepartment of Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, PO Box 30001, HPC: AA43, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Nynke SmidtDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Barbara C van MunsterDepartment of Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, PO Box 30001, HPC: AA43, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Sophia E de RooijDepartment of Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, PO Box 30001, HPC: AA43, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
University Medical Center Groningen · NLUniversity of Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is growing interest for interventions aiming at preventing frailty progression or even to reverse frailty in older people, yet it is still unclear which frailty instrument is most appropriate for measuring change scores over time to determine the effectiveness of interventions. The aim of this prospective cohort study was to determine reproducibility and responsiveness properties of the Frailty Index (FI) and Frailty Phenotype (FP) in acutely hospitalized medical patients aged 70 years and older.

methodsReproducibility was assessed by Intra-Class Correlation Coefficients (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable change (SDC); Responsiveness was assessed by the standardized response mean (SRM), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

resultsAt baseline, 243 patients were included with a median age of 76 years (range 70-98). The analytic samples included 192 and 187 patients in the three and twelve months follow-up analyses, respectively. ICC of the FI were 0.85 (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.76; 0.91) and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.77; 0.90), and 0.65 (95% CI: 0.49; 0.77) and 0.77 (95% CI: 0.65; 0.84) for the FP. SEM ranged from 5 to 13 %; SDC from 13 to 37 %. SRMs were good in patients with unchanged frailty status (< 0.50), and doubtful to good for deteriorated and improved patients (0.43-1.00). AUC's over three months were 0.77 (95% CI: 0.69; 0.86) and 0.71 (95% CI: 0.62; 0.79) for the FI, and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.58; 0.77) and 0.65 (95% CI: 0.55; 0.74) for the FP. Over twelve months, AUCs were 0.78 (95% CI: 0.69; 0.87) and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.73; 0.90) for the FI, and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.69; 0.87) and 0.75 (95% CI: 0.67; 0.84) for the FP.

conclusionsThe Frailty Index showed better reproducibility and responsiveness properties compared to the Frailty Phenotype among acutely hospitalized older patients.

Indexed as

FrailtyAgedAged, 80 and overFrail ElderlyGeriatric AssessmentHumansPhenotypeProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsFrailGeriatric careMeasurement propertiesPsychometric propertiesReliability, Internal Medicine

Identifiers

PMID34535074
PMCPMC8447764
OpenAlexW3199246774

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.