ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023
Comparison of Frailty Assessment Tools for Older Thai Individuals at the Out-Patient Clinic of the Family Medicine Department.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. 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.
- Development and validation of the Frailty Questionnaire-5 (FQ-5), a PRISMA-7-derived screening tool for frailty: a diagnostic accuracy study in primary care.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Development of a frailty screening tool using components from clinical parameters and frailty criteria for Thai community-dwelling older adults.BMC geriatrics · 2026Observational
- Global frailty screening tools: Review and application of frailty screening tools from 2001 to 2023.Intractable & rare diseases research · 2024Review
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
This study evaluated the validity of the screening tools used to evaluate the frailty status of older Thai people. A cross-sectional study of 251 patients aged 60 years or more in an out-patient department was conducted using the Frailty Assessment Tool of the Thai Ministry of Public Health (FATMPH) and the Frail Non-Disabled (FiND) questionnaire, and the results were compared with Fried's Frailty Phenotype (FFP). The validity of the data acquired using each method was evaluated by examining their sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and Cohen's kappa coefficient. Most of the participants were female (60.96%), and most were between 60 and 69 years old (65.34%). The measured prevalences of frailty were 8.37%, 17.53%, and 3.98% using FFP, FATMPH, and FiND tools, respectively. FATMP had a sensitivity of 57.14%, a specificity of 86.09%, a PPV of 27.27%, and an NPV of 95.65%. FiND had a sensitivity of 19.05%, a specificity of 97.39%, a PPV of 40.00%, and an NPV of 92.94%. The results of the Cohen's kappa comparison of these two tools and FFP were 0.298 for FATMPH and 0.147 for FiND. The predictive values of both FATMPH and FiND were insufficient for assessing frailty in a clinical setting. Additional research on other frailty tools is necessary to improve the accuracy of frailty screening in the older population of Thailand.
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.