ReviewCureus2022
Diagnosing Frailty in Primary Care Practice.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interplay between frailty and cardiometabolic disorders: from pathophysiology to clinical implications.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2025Pooled it
- Real-World Implementation of PRISMA-7 and Clinical Frailty Scale for Frailty Identification and Integrated Care Activation: A Cross-Sectional Study in Northern Italian Primary Practice.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Reimagining the frailty review: meaning, metrics, and the missed opportunity in global ageing care.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- To Be Frail or Not to Be Frail: This Is the Question-A Critical Narrative Review of Frailty.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Association between Sarcopenia and Poor Glycemic Control in Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Multiple Myeloma in 2023 Ways: From Trials to Real Life.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Frailty is a complex age-related clinical condition with increased vulnerability to negative health outcomes that manifest as a multidimensional syndrome and hence, a challenge to identify at-risk populations. We aim to summarize the implementation of strategies to diagnose fragility in family practice using current evidence. We searched the PubMed and Google Scholar databases for relevant articles, using the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms "Frailty," "Frailty Scales," and "Primary Health Care." All original research articles on the elderly population (65 years of age or older) published in English and the last five years were included. Frailty diagnosis has resulted in positive outcomes in the overall literature. Recent hospital admission may indicate a health problem that can end up in a negative outcome and has been often described as associated with frailty. It was also shown to affect the intensive care units' mortality, in-hospital mortality, and long-term mortality. However, multiple screening instruments have been developed and validated to improve feasibility in clinical practice. The frequent lack of agreement between frailty instruments has slowed the broad implementation of these tools. The impacts of frailty warrant an upstream, proactive, holistic, interprofessional primary care approach to its identification, assessment, and management. It is a preventable disorder; identifying elderly patients at risk in primary care can help shape appropriate care processes tailored to their needs. This literature review aims to demonstrate the importance and strategies in identifying frailty in primary care settings and assess its impact on several outcomes.
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.