ArticlePloS one2022
Registered report protocol: A scoping review to identify potential predictors as features for developing automated estimation of the probability of being frail in secondary care.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe impact of frailty surges, as the prevalence increases with age and the population age is rising. Frailty is associated with adverse health outcomes and increased healthcare costs. Many validated instruments to detect frailty have been developed. Using these in clinical practice takes time. Automated estimation of the probability of being frail using routinely collected data from hospital electronic health records (EHRs) would circumvent that. We aim to identify potential predictors that could be used as features for modeling algorithms on the basis of routine hospital EHR data to incorporate in an automated tool for estimating the probability of being frail.
methodsPubMed (MEDLINE), CINAHL Plus, Embase, and Web of Science will be searched. The studied population consists of older people (≥65 years). The first step is searching articles published ≥2018. Second, we add two published literature reviews (and the articles included therein) [Bery 2020; Bouillon, 2013] to our search results. In these reviews, articles on potential predictor variables in frailty screening tools were included from inception until March 2018. The goal is to identify and extract all potential predictors of being frail. Domain experts will be consulted to evaluate the results. DISCUSSION: The results of the intended study will increase the quality of the developed algorithms to be used for automated estimation of the probability of being frail in secondary care. This is a promising perspective, being less labor-intensive compared to screening each individual patient by hand. Also, such an automated tool may raise awareness of frailty, especially in those patients who would not be screened for frailty by hand because they seem robust.
conclusionThe identified potential predictors of being frail can be used as evidence-based input for machine learning based automated estimation of the probability of being frail using routine EHR data in the near future.
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.