Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36450240›Full record

ArticleGerontology2023

Two Years with COVID-19: The Electronic Frailty Index Identifies High-Risk Patients in the Stockholm GeroCovid Study.

Jonathan K L Mak, Maria Eriksdotter, Martin Annetorp, Ralf Kuja-Halkola, Laura Kananen, Anne-Marie Boström, Miia Kivipelto, Carina Metzner, Viktoria Bäck Jerlardtz, Malin Engström and 9 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gerontology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Frailty Indices and Their Importance in Elderly Patients: A Perspective Review.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

19 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Jonathan K L MakDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden, jonathan.mak@ki.se.
Maria EriksdotterDivision of Clinical Geriatrics, Department of Neurobiology, Care sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Martin AnnetorpDivision of Clinical Geriatrics, Department of Neurobiology, Care sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ralf Kuja-HalkolaDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Laura KananenDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Anne-Marie BoströmTheme Inflammation and Aging, Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, Sweden.
Miia KivipeltoDivision of Clinical Geriatrics, Department of Neurobiology, Care sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Carina MetznerDivision of Clinical Geriatrics, Department of Neurobiology, Care sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Viktoria Bäck JerlardtzDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, Jakobsbergsgeriatriken, Stockholm, Sweden.
Malin EngströmDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, Sabbatsbergsgeriatriken, Stockholm, Sweden.
Peter JohnsonDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, Capio Geriatrik Nacka AB, Nacka, Sweden.
Lars Göran LundbergDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, Dalengeriatriken Aleris Närsjukvård AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
Elisabet ÅkessonResearch and Development Unit, Stockholms Sjukhem, Stockholm, Sweden.
Carina Sühl ÖbergDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, Handengeriatriken, Aleris Närsjukvård AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
Maria OlssonDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, Capio Geriatrik Löwet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Tommy CederholmDivision of Clinical Geriatrics, Department of Neurobiology, Care sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Sara HäggDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Dorota ReligaDivision of Clinical Geriatrics, Department of Neurobiology, Care sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Juulia JylhäväDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Karolinska University Hospital · SEKarolinska Institutet · SETampere University · FICentre for Palaeogenetics · SESabbatsberg Hospital · SEUppsala University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFrailty, a measure of biological aging, has been linked to worse COVID-19 outcomes. However, as the mortality differs across the COVID-19 waves, it is less clear whether a medical record-based electronic frailty index (eFI) that we have previously developed for older adults could be used for risk stratification in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

objectivesThe aim of the study was to examine the association of frailty with mortality, readmission, and length of stay in older COVID-19 patients and to compare the predictive accuracy of the eFI to other frailty and comorbidity measures.

methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study using electronic health records (EHRs) from nine geriatric clinics in Stockholm, Sweden, comprising 3,980 COVID-19 patients (mean age 81.6 years) admitted between March 2020 and March 2022. Frailty was assessed using a 48-item eFI developed for Swedish geriatric patients, the Clinical Frailty Scale, and the Hospital Frailty Risk Score. Comorbidity was measured using the Charlson Comorbidity Index. We analyzed in-hospital mortality and 30-day readmission using logistic regression, 30-day and 6-month mortality using Cox regression, and the length of stay using linear regression. Predictive accuracy of the logistic regression and Cox models was evaluated by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and Harrell's C-statistic, respectively.

resultsAcross the study period, the in-hospital mortality rate decreased from 13.9% in the first wave to 3.6% in the latest (Omicron) wave. Controlling for age and sex, a 10% increment in the eFI was significantly associated with higher risks of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio = 2.95; 95% confidence interval = 2.42-3.62), 30-day mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.39; 2.08-2.74), 6-month mortality (HR = 2.29; 2.04-2.56), and a longer length of stay (β-coefficient = 2.00; 1.65-2.34) but not with 30-day readmission. The association between the eFI and in-hospital mortality remained robust across the waves, even after the vaccination rollout. Among all measures, the eFI had the best discrimination for in-hospital (AUC = 0.780), 30-day (Harrell's C = 0.733), and 6-month mortality (Harrell's C = 0.719).

conclusionAn eFI based on routinely collected EHRs can be applied in identifying high-risk older COVID-19 patients during the continuing pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19FrailtyAgedAged, 80 and overElectronicsFrail ElderlyGeriatric AssessmentHumansRetrospective StudiesComorbidityCOVID-19Electronic frailty indexFrailtyOlder adults

Identifiers

PMID36450240
PMCPMC9747746
OpenAlexW4310572055

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.