Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35382752›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2022

An international Delphi consensus process to determine a common data element and core outcome set for frailty: FOCUS (The Frailty Outcomes Consensus Project).

Jeanette C Prorok, Paula R Williamson, Beverley Shea, Darryl Rolfson, Leocadio Rodriguez Mañas, Matteo Cesari, Perry Kim, John Muscedere

Abstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

8 authors.

Jeanette C ProrokCanadian Frailty Network, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Paula R WilliamsonUniversity of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Beverley SheaUniversity of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Darryl RolfsonUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Leocadio Rodriguez MañasHospital Universitario de Getafe ES, Madrid, Spain.
Matteo CesariUniversity of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Perry KimCanadian Frailty Network, Kingston, ON, Canada.
John MuscedereCanadian Frailty Network, Kingston, ON, Canada. john.muscedere@kingstonhsc.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite increased recognition of frailty and its importance, high quality evidence to guide decision-making is lacking. There has been variation in reported data elements and outcomes which makes it challenging to interpret results across studies as well as to generalize research findings. The creation of a frailty core set, consisting of a minimum set of data elements and outcomes to be measured in all frailty studies, would allow for findings from research and translational studies to be collectively analyzed to better inform care and decision-making. To achieve this, the Frailty Outcomes Consensus Project was developed to reach consensus from the international frailty community on a set of common data elements and core outcomes for frailty.

methodsAn international steering committee developed the methodology and the consensus process to be followed. The committee formulated the initial list of data elements and outcomes. Participants from across the world were invited to take part in the Delphi consensus process. The Delphi consisted of three rounds. Following review of data after three rounds, a final ranking round of data elements and outcomes was conducted. A required retention rate of 80% between rounds was set a priori.

resultsOne hundred and eighty-four panelists from 25 different countries participated in the first round of the Delphi consensus process. This included researchers, clinicians, administrators, older adults, and caregivers. The retention rate between rounds was achieved. Data elements and outcomes forming primary and secondary core sets were identified, within the domains of participant characteristics, physical performance, physical function, physical health, cognition and mental health, socioenvironmental circumstances, frailty measures, and other.

conclusionIt is anticipated that implementation and uptake of the frailty core set will enable studies to be collectively analyzed to better inform care for persons living with frailty and ultimately improve their outcomes. Future work will focus on identification of measurement tools to be used in the application of the frailty core set.

Indexed as

Common Data ElementsFrailtyAgedDelphi TechniqueHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareResearch DesignTreatment OutcomeCOMETCommon data elementsCore outcome setDelphiFrailtyOMERACT

Identifiers

PMID35382752
PMCPMC8985339

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.