Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35231096›Full record

ArticleAge and ageing2022

Assessment of coding-based frailty algorithms for long-term outcome prediction among older people in community settings: a cohort study from the Shizuoka Kokuho Database.

Shiori Nishimura, Hiraku Kumamaru, Satoshi Shoji, Eiji Nakatani, Hiroyuki Yamamoto, Nao Ichihara, Yoshiki Miyachi, Alexander T Sandhu, Paul A Heidenreich, Keita Yamauchi and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Age and ageing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Evolution and challenges of physician-led home visits in Japan.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Kidney outcomes with SGLT2 inhibitor versus DPP4 inhibitor use in older adults with diabetes.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

13 authors.

Shiori NishimuraDepartment of Healthcare Quality Assessment, The University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiraku KumamaruDepartment of Healthcare Quality Assessment, The University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Satoshi ShojiShizuoka Graduate University of Public Health, Shizuoka, Japan.
Eiji NakataniShizuoka Graduate University of Public Health, Shizuoka, Japan.
Hiroyuki YamamotoDepartment of Healthcare Quality Assessment, The University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Nao IchiharaDepartment of Healthcare Quality Assessment, The University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Yoshiki MiyachiShizuoka Graduate University of Public Health, Shizuoka, Japan.
Alexander T SandhuDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
Paul A HeidenreichDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
Keita YamauchiKeio University Graduate School of Health Management, Kanagawa, Japan.
Michiko WatanabeDepartment of Data Science, Rissho University, Saitama, Japan.
Hiroaki MiyataDepartment of Healthcare Quality Assessment, The University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Shun KohsakaDepartment of Healthcare Quality Assessment, The University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

The Effect of Value-based Payment on Heart Failure Quality of Care (Value-HF)K23HL151672 · NHLBI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI SANDHU, ALEXANDER · 2020 to 2024
$854k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL151672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess the applicability of Electronic Frailty Index (eFI) and Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) algorithms to Japanese administrative claims data and to evaluate their association with long-term outcomes. STUDY DESIGN AND

settingA cohort study using a regional government administrative healthcare and long-term care (LTC) claims database in Japan 2014-18.

participantsPlan enrollees aged ≥50 years.

methodsWe applied the two algorithms to the cohort and assessed the scores' distributions alongside enrollees' 4-year mortality and initiation of government-supported LTC. Using Cox regression and Fine-Gray models, we evaluated the association between frailty scores and outcomes as well as the models' discriminatory ability.

resultsAmong 827,744 enrollees, 42.8% were categorised by eFI as fit, 31.2% mild, 17.5% moderate and 8.5% severe. For HFRS, 73.0% were low, 24.3% intermediate and 2.7% high risk; 35 of 36 predictors for eFI, and 92 of 109 codes originally used for HFRS were available in the Japanese system. Relative to the lowest frailty group, the highest frailty group had hazard ratios [95% confidence interval (CI)] of 2.09 (1.98-2.21) for mortality and 2.45 (2.28-2.63) for LTC for eFI; those for HFRS were 3.79 (3.56-4.03) and 3.31 (2.87-3.82), respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curves for the unadjusted model at 48 months was 0.68 for death and 0.68 for LTC for eFI, and 0.73 and 0.70, respectively, for HFRS.

conclusionsThe frailty algorithms were applicable to the Japanese system and could contribute to the identifications of enrollees at risk of long-term mortality or LTC use.

Indexed as

FrailtyAgedAlgorithmsCohort StudiesFrail ElderlyHumansRetrospective Studiesadministrative claims dataElectronic Frailty IndexfrailtyHospital Frailty Risk Scorelong-term careolder people

Identifiers

PMID35231096
PMCPMC9077119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.