Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39980935›Full record

ArticleKidney medicine2025

Frailty Assessment Tools in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Alisha Puri, Anita M Lloyd, Aminu K Bello, Marcello Tonelli, Sandra M Campbell, Karthik Tennankore, Sara N Davison, Stephanie Thompson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Kidney medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Frailty Among Patients With ADPKD.Kidney international reports · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

8 authors.

Alisha PuriMeharry Medical College, Nashville, TN.
Anita M LloydDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Aminu K BelloDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Marcello TonelliDepartment of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Sandra M CampbellUniversity of Alberta Library, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Karthik TennankoreDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Nova Scotia Health Authority, Halifax, NS, Canada.
Sara N DavisonDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Stephanie ThompsonDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rationale & Objective: Frailty represents a loss of physiologic reserve across multiple biological systems, confers a higher risk of adverse health outcomes, and is highly prevalent among people with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We evaluated the measurement properties of frailty tools used in CKD and summarized the association of frailty with death and hospitalization. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Setting & Study Populations: Studies assessing multidimensional frailty tools in adults at any stage of CKD and evaluating a measurement property of interest as per the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments taxonomy. Selection Criteria for Studies: Observational studies and randomized trials. Data Extraction: Risk and precision measurements; measurement properties. Analytical Approach: The Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment was the clinical standard for frailty identification. We pooled data using random effects models or summarized with narrative synthesis when data were too heterogenous to pool. Results: We included 105 studies with data for at least one of the following: discriminative (n = 84; 80%), convergent (n = 20; 19%), and criterion validity (n = 2; 2%); responsiveness (n = 9; 9%) and reliability (n = 1; 0.1%). For the Fried Frailty Phenotype (FFP), the pooled adjusted HR (aHR) for mortality was 2.01 (95% confidence intervals [CI], 1.35-2.98; Limitations: Few studies compared the accuracy of frailty tools to the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment. Only 1 study reported reliability. Studies were of overall low-moderate quality. Conclusions: The FFP and Clinical Frailty Scale showed acceptable discriminant validity for clinical outcomes, and the modified FFP is an alternative tool to use if direct measurements are not feasible. The evidence does not support the use of clinicians' subjective impression to identify frailty.

Indexed as

Assessmentchronic kidney diseasedialysisfrailtyhospitalizationkidney failuremortalitysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID39980935
PMCPMC11841092

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.