ArticleBMJ open2024
Defining and assessing psychological frailty in older adults: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Doctors' and Pharmacists' knowledge, skills, and perception of mental frailty in older adults: a scoping review.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Social frailty, functional ability and social capital: a study among urban slum older adults in Tamil Nadu, India-convergent parallel mixed method study.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Association of multidimensional frailty and dynapenia with fall risk in older adults.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Profiles of physical frailty, social frailty, and cognitive impairment among older adults in rural areas of China: a latent profile analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Effectiveness and usability of care robots in supporting older adults living with frailty: A systematic review.Digital healthReview
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
introductionFrailty is widely acknowledged as a multidimensional construct encompassing physical, psychological and social aspects. However, the lack of consensus in defining and operationalising psychological frailty challenges the holistic approach to frailty advocated by health professionals. Consequently, there is a need to develop a comprehensive definition of psychological frailty based on contributions made by experts in the field, primarily existing frailty assessment tools. This scoping review will aim to identify the key psychological variables that are considered in frailty assessment tools used with older adults as well as to analyse how these psychological variables have been operationalised. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study will be conducted in accordance with recommendations from several methodological frameworks for scoping reviews and will be reported following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews statement guidelines. A systematic literature search will be performed in the CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Scopus and Web of Science databases, supplemented by a search in Google Scholar and reference lists. The focus will be on studies that describe the development of multicomponent frailty assessment tools including at least one psychological variable. Study selection and data extraction will be independently conducted by three reviewers working in pairs. Data will be presented in tabular form, and the data will be analysed using qualitative content analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study does not require ethical approval since it is based on secondary data analysis. The findings of the review will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and will be presented at conferences and seminars. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The scoping review was registered in Open Science Framework on 29 March 2022 (https://osf.io/bn24y).
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.