Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35035945›Full record

ArticleClinical kidney journal2022

Correlations, agreement and utility of frailty instruments in prevalent haemodialysis patients: baseline cohort data from the FITNESS study.

Benjamin M Anderson, Muhammad Qasim, Gonzalo Correa, Felicity Evison, Suzy Gallier, Charles J Ferro, Thomas A Jackson, Adnan Sharif

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Healthy aging and chronic kidney disease.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2022
    Article
  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.

Benjamin M AndersonDepartment of Nephrology and Transplantation, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5896-5823
Muhammad QasimDepartment of Nephrology and Transplantation, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
Gonzalo CorreaDepartment of Nephrology, Hospital del Salvador, Santiago, Chile.
Felicity EvisonDepartment of Health Informatics, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
Suzy GallierDepartment of Health Informatics, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
Charles J FerroDepartment of Nephrology and Transplantation, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0577-7081
Thomas A JacksonInstitute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6320-9600
Adnan SharifDepartment of Nephrology and Transplantation, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7586-9136

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFrailty is associated with poor outcomes for haemodialysis patients, but its prevalence is uncertain due to heterogeneous definitions. The aim of this study was to compare and contrast prevalence and features of commonly used frailty instruments in a British haemodialysis cohort.

methodsThe FITNESS (Frailty Intervention Trial iN End-Stage patientS on haemodialysis) study recruited adults aged ≥18 years after informed consent, with ≥3 months haemodialysis exposure and no hospital admission within 4 weeks unless for dialysis access. Study participants were clinically phenotyped with frailty instruments including the Frailty Index (FI), Frailty Phenotype (FP), Edmonton Frailty Scale (EFS) and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), alongside comprehensive baseline data collection of biochemical, clinical and social characteristics.

resultsBetween 12 January 2018 and 18 April 2019, 485 haemodialysis patients were recruited. Baseline demographics were median age 63 years, male sex 58.6% and non-White ethnicity 42.1%. Prevalence of frailty was high; 41.9% of participants were frail by FP, 63.3% by FI, 50.2% by EFS and 53.8% by CFS. Female gender was associated with increased frailty, with no independent association observed with age or ethnicity. While correlation between frailty instruments was strong, intraclass correlation coefficient for frailty agreement was 0.628 (95% confidence interval 0.585-0.669) and only weak agreement between instrument pairs.

conclusionFrailty is highly prevalent among haemodialysis patients regardless of criteria used. However, our data suggest caution when interpreting heterogenous definitions of frailty for haemodialysis patients as they are not interchangeable. Consensus agreement on the optimal frailty definition for haemodialysis patients must balance ease of use with predictive ability for adverse outcomes before determining clinical application.

Indexed as

ageepidemiologyESRDhaemodialysisphysical activityquality of life

Identifiers

PMID35035945
PMCPMC8757414

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.