SynthesisDrugs & aging2024
Assessing Frailty-Specific Treatment Effect in Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Drugs & aging, 2024. 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.
- Frailty and the efficacy and safety of surgical versus endovascular revascularization: post-hoc analysis of the BEST-CLI trial.The British journal of surgery · 2026Trial
- Frailty, polypharmacy, deprescribing, and 23-hour activity: insights from a mouse model.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2026Article
- Integrating frailty interventions into existing care models: a comprehensive approach to enhancing patient outcomes in chronic disease management.Frontiers in public health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinicians are increasingly considering using frailty assessments to individualize treatment for older patients. It remains uncertain whether interventions to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) events offer similar benefits between older adults with and without frailty.
methodsA systematic literature search was undertaken in PubMed and Embase, adhering to PRISMA guidelines. Key inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials published between January 2007 and September 2024 with CVD outcomes as an endpoint and data on frailty-specific treatment effects. Data were collected for population characteristics, intervention, follow-up time, frailty measure, outcome rates, and frailty subgroup treatment effect. Due to heterogeneity among the studies, the results were not pooled.
resultsThe search identified 151 unique studies, of which 18 were included. Using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0, 12 out of the 18 studies have low risk of bias. The intervention was more effective in frail participants than in non-frail counterparts in two studies (e.g., aerobic exercise), less effective in frail participants in three studies (e.g., intensive lifestyle intervention), similarly effective across frailty levels in seven studies (e.g., prasugrel), and inconclusive in six studies (e.g., edoxaban). Some treatments were similarly effective across frailty level by hazard ratio but had a greater reduction in absolute risk for frail versus non-frail patients.
conclusionsCardiovascular interventions may provide differential benefits by patients' frailty. These findings suggest the potential utility of frailty assessment for optimizing cardiovascular interventions.
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.