ArticlePloS one2023
On the comparability of frailty scores under the accumulation of deficits approach.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Frailty Through a One Health Lens: Biological Sex, Mental Health, and Oral Function in Physically Active Older Adults.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Observational
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
backgroundWhile the cumulative deficit model is arguably the most popular instrument for population-level frailty screening, several questions remain unanswered regarding the comparability of the resulting scores across subpopulations.
methodsBased on data from the five waves of the Mexican Health and Aging Study (MHAS) we draw upon the alignment method to test for measurement invariance of frailty scores as per the accumulation of deficits approach.
resultsOur results show that adjusting for measurement non-invariance not only improves predictive validity of our frailty measures, but resulting scores are more consistent with what is theoretically expected from them in longitudinal research.
conclusionsThere are clear potential benefits of measurement invariance testing as a general analytical framework from which to tackle with issues of comparability in frailty research.
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.