ArticleEinstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2024
Frailty over the rainbow: a cross-sectional study of LGBT+ adults aged over 50 years.
Article in Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveTo investigate differences in the prevalence of frailty between LGBT+ and non-LGBT+ older adults.
methodsA cross-sectional study involving Brazilians aged 50 and over was performed. The participants were invited to participate in an anonymous online survey between August 2019 and January 2020. The survey was widely distributed in neighborhood associations, day centers, non-governmental organizations, and social media. Those who identified as homosexual, bisexual, pansexual, non-heterosexual, transgender, travesti, or non-binary were grouped as LGBT+. Participants who were both cisgender and heterosexual were categorized as non-LGBT+. Frailty was measured using the FRAIL scale, and the participants were categorized as robust, prefrail, or frail. Generalized ordered logistic models were used to examine the adjusted association between LGBT+ status and frailty according to age and sex.
resultsThe study sample included 6,693 participants with a median age of 60 years. Overall, 1,332 patients were LGBT+ (19.9%), and 5,361 were non-LGBT+ (80.1%). Pre-frailty or frailty was observed in 656 (49%) LGBT+ participants and 2,460 (46%) non-LGBT+ participants (p=0.03). Multivariate analyses showed that being LGBT+ was independently associated with frailty in female participants aged ≥50 years (OR=1.52, 95%CI=1.08-2.13, p=0.02) and male participants aged ≥60 years (OR=2.83, 95%CI=1.41-5.69, p=0.004). Non-cisgender participants were also more likely to be frail than cisgender participants (OR=2.21, 95%CI=1.42-3.42, p<0.001).
conclusionLGBT+ status was independently associated with frailty in female adults aged >50 years and males aged > 60 years. More research in this area and inclusive government policies are needed to promote the healthy aging of the LGBT+ population.
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.