Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38783754›Full record

ArticleAge and ageing2024

A comparison of frailty measures in population-based data for patients with colorectal cancer.

Rebecca Birch, John Taylor, Tameera Rahman, Riccardo Audisio, Sophie Pilleron, Philip Quirke, Simon Howell, Amy Downing, Eva Morris

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Age and ageing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

9 authors.

Rebecca BirchLeeds Institute for Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1579-1397
John TaylorLeeds Institute for Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Tameera RahmanHealth Data Insight CIC, Cambridge, UK.
Riccardo AudisioDepartment of Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Sophie PilleronAgeing, Cancer, and Disparities Research Unit, Department of Precision Health, Luxembourg Institute of Health, 1A-B, rue Thomas Edison, 1445 Strassen, Luxembourg.
Philip QuirkeLeeds Institute for Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Simon HowellLeeds Institute for Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Amy DowningLeeds Institute for Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Eva MorrisNuffield Department of Population Health, Big Data Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1075-6544

Funding

Biomedical Research Centre and the Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre NIHR203311Cancer Research UK C23434/A23706Department of Health and Social CareLeeds National Institute for Health and Care Research NIHR203331Luxembourg National Research Fund 16731054Yorkshire Cancer Research L394
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNumerous studies have revealed age-related inequalities in colorectal cancer care. Increasing levels of frailty in an ageing population may be contributing to this, but quantifying frailty in population-based studies is challenging.

objectiveTo assess the feasibility, validity and reliability of the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS), the Secondary Care Administrative Records Frailty (SCARF) index and the frailty syndromes (FS) measures in a national colorectal cancer cohort.

designRetrospective population-based study using 136,008 patients with colorectal cancer treated within the English National Health Service.

methodsEach measure was generated in the dataset to assess their feasibility. The diagnostic codes used in each measure were compared with those in the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Validity was assessed using the prevalence of frailty and relationship with 1-year survival. The Brier score and the c-statistic were used to assess performance and discriminative ability of models with included each measure.

resultsAll measures demonstrated feasibility, validity and reliability. Diagnostic codes used in SCARF and CCI have considerable overlap. Prevalence of frailty determined by each differed; SCARF allocating 55.4% of the population to the lowest risk group compared with 85.1% (HFRS) and 81.2% (FS). HFRS and FS demonstrated the greatest difference in 1-year overall survival between those with the lowest and highest measured levels of frailty. Differences in model performance were marginal.

conclusionsHFRS, SCARF and FS all have value in quantifying frailty in routine administrative health care datasets. The most suitable measure will depend on the context and requirements of each individual epidemiological study.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsFeasibility StudiesFrailtyAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsEnglandFemaleFrail ElderlyGeriatric AssessmentHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsPrevalenceReproducibility of Resultscolorectal cancerfrailtyinequalitiesinequitiesolder peoplesurvival

Identifiers

PMID38783754
PMCPMC11116828

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.