ArticleScientific reports2022
Variability and agreement of frailty measures and risk of falls, hospital admissions and mortality in TILDA.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Implementation of Frailty Assessment Tools in the Acute Care Setting: A Scoping Review.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2025Article
- Dissecting the shared genetic architecture between Alzheimer's disease and frailty: a cross-trait meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- Development and validation of a physical frailty phenotype index-based model to estimate the frailty index.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Little is known about the within-person variability of different frailty instruments, their agreement over time, and whether use of repeat assessments could improve the strength of associations with adverse health outcomes. Repeat measurements recorded in 2010-2011 (Wave 1) and 2012 (Wave 2) from The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA) were used to classify individuals with frailty using the frailty phenotype (FP) and frailty index (FI). Within-person variability and agreement of frailty classifications were assessed using ANOVA and kappa (K) statistics, respectively. Associations of each frailty measure (wave 1, wave 2, or mean of both waves) with risk of falls, hospitalisations and all-cause mortality were assessed using logistic regression. Among 7455 individuals (mean age 64.7 [SD 9.9] years), within-person SD was 0.664 units (95% CI 0.654-0.671) for FP and 2 health deficits (SD 0.050 [0.048-0.051]) for FI. Agreement of frailty was modest for both measures, but higher for FI (K 0.600 [0.584-0.615]) than FP (K 0.370 [0.348-0.401]). The odds ratios (ORs) for all-cause mortality were higher for frailty assessed using the mean of two versus single measurements for FI (ORs for mortality 3.5 [2.6-4.9] vs. 2.7 [1.9-3.4], respectively) and FP (ORs for mortality 6.9 [4.6-10.3] vs. 4.0 [2.8-5.635], respectively). Frailty scores based on single measurements had substantial within-person variability, but the agreement in classification of frailty was higher for FI than FP. Frailty assessed using the mean of two or more measurements recorded at separate visits was more strongly associated with adverse health outcomes than those recorded at a single visit.
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.