ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2021
A Simplified Frailty Index Predicts Mortality in Older Adults in Beijing.
Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Frailty and risks of all-cause and cause-specific death in community-dwelling adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC geriatrics · 2022Pooled it
- Predicting Mortality in Older Adults Using Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment: A Comparative Study of Traditional Statistics and Machine Learning Approaches.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Frailty index is an independent predictor of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in Eastern Europe: a multicentre cohort study.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2024Article
- 10-Year Follow-up of the Original Faroese Septuagenarian Cohort: Focus on Frailty and Association With All-cause Mortality.Gerontology & geriatric medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is an integral tool used to identify vulnerable older adults in need of individualized plans to delay the course of diseases and monitor treatment outcomes. We previously developed and validated a 68-item frailty index (FI) based on the CGA in a large, older, Chinese population. However, substantial time is needed to evaluate the 68 items. Therefore, we aimed to develop and validate a simplified FI for use in Chinese older population.
designLongitudinal study. SETTING AND
participantsData were drawn from the Beijing Longitudinal Study of Aging. The study was conducted in 2004 with 1808 participants evaluated using the CGA and was followed-up for 13 years. Mortality was recorded at 3, 5, 8, 10, and 13 years intervals. MEASURES: 27-Item, 50-item, and 68-item frailty indices were investigated. A Cox proportional hazards model and area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC) were calculated to compare mortality predictions.
resultsThe FI was positively correlated with age in males (r = 0.174, P <0.001) and females (r = 0.270, P <0.001). The mean baseline FI was 0.225 ± 0.085 (range: 0.04-0.56) as evaluated by the 27-item FI, 0.181 ± 0.117 (range: 0.02-0.62) by the 50-item FI, and 0.167 ± 0.101 (range: 0.02-0.59) by the 68-item FI. Cox regression models showed that mortality was significantly higher in frail people than in non-frail people for all 3 indices (p<0.001). The AUCs of the 68-item FI, 50-item FI, and 27-item FI for predicting mortality were 0.720, 0.717, and 0.677, respectively (p<0.001).
conclusionThe 27-item FI is reasonable to expect that the AUC of the indices with the higher items number is inferior to the performance of the indices with higher number of items (FI50 and FI68). But 27-item maybe used as a tool to identify frail older adults and predict mortality in clinical and primary care practices in China.
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.