Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37738215›Full record

ArticleThe journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences2024

Reliability of the Frailty Index Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults.

Erwin Stolz, Hannes Mayerl, Judith Godin, Emiel O Hoogendijk, Olga Theou, Wolfgang Freidl, Kenneth Rockwood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Short-term Frailty Index Fluctuations in Older Adults: Noise or Signal?The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

7 authors.

Erwin StolzInstitute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-7393-1568
Hannes MayerlInstitute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-8708-8831
Judith GodinGeriatric Medicine, Dalhousie University and Nova Scotia Health, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0272-7268
Emiel O HoogendijkDepartment of Epidemiology & Data Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC-Location VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9660-5108
Olga TheouSchool of Physiotherapy, Geriatric Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6460-782X
Wolfgang FreidlInstitute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-9525-5898
Kenneth RockwoodGeriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, Dalhousie University and Nova Scotia Health, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6674-995X

Funding

Austrian Science Fund P33673CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConsistent and reproducible estimates of the underlying true level of frailty are essential for risk stratification and monitoring of health changes. The purpose of this study is to examine the reliability of the frailty index (FI).

methodsA total of 426 community-dwelling older adults from the FRequent health Assessment In Later life (FRAIL70+) study in Austria were interviewed biweekly up to 7 times. Two versions of the FI, one with 49 deficits (baseline), and another with 44 (follow-up) were created. Internal consistency was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis and coefficient omega. Test-retest reliability was assessed with Pearson correlation coefficients and the intraclass correlation coefficient. Measurement error was assessed with the standard error of measurement, limits of agreement, and smallest detectable change.

resultsParticipants (64.6% women) were on average 77.2 (±5.4) years old with mean FI49 at a baseline of 0.19 (±0.14). Internal consistency (coefficient omega) was 0.81. Correlations between biweekly FI44 assessments ranged between 0.86 and 0.94 and reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient) was 0.88. The standard error of measurement was 0.05, and the smallest detectable change and upper limits of agreement were 0.13; the latter is larger than previously reported minimal clinically meaningful changes.

conclusionsBoth internal consistency and reliability of the FI were good, that is, the FI differentiates well between community-dwelling older adults, which is an important requirement for risk stratification for both group-level oriented research and patient-level clinical purposes. Measurement error, however, was large, suggesting that individual health deteriorations or improvements, cannot be reliably detected for FI changes smaller than 0.13.

Indexed as

FrailtyIndependent LivingAgedFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsFrailInternal consistencyLongitudinalMeasurement errorPsychometricReliability

Identifiers

PMID37738215
PMCPMC10809054

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.