ArticleEuropean geriatric medicine2025
Validation of the nurse directed frailty assessment tool, to identify patients at risk of emergency department visits, hospitalisation, and 1-year all-cause mortality.
Article in European geriatric medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Redirection of Urgent Geriatric Care: Diagnostics and Treatment Parallel to the Emergency Department.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Polypharmacy and cardiovascular co-morbidity as key contributors to frailty in geriatric patients with AF - insights of the Dutch-GERAF cohort study.BMC geriatrics · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
methodsThis is a validation study of a new frailty assessment that can be administered by outpatient care nurses. The nurse directed frailty assessment (NDFA) encompasses the medical, psychological, social, and functional domain, based on standard care, and can be performed without any specialised equipment. Performance of the NDFA is compared to a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA)-based frailty index (FI), with generalised linear model with reporting of hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). The best cutoff value for the NDFA was assessed by Youden index and the area under the receiver operator curve (ROC).
resultsWithin 1 year, 15 patients (5%) died, 57 (18%) had an unplanned hospital admission, and 83 (26%) visited the emergency department (ED). Based on the Youden index and ROC curve, the best cutoff value for the NDFA was 4 points. With a binary logistic regression model, an HR of 3.59 (95% CI 1.16-11.15, p < 0.001) was found for mortality. In the general mixed model with Poisson logistic regression, an HR of 1.78 (95% CI 1.06-2.97, p 0.028) was found for unplanned hospital and an HR of 1.87 (95% CI 1.25-2.78, p 0.002) was found for ED visits. The HR and 95% CI of the FI were similar for all three outcome measures.
conclusionsThe NDFA identifies patients at risk for hospitalisation, emergency department visits, and mortality within 12 months equally well as the FI. Further research is necessary to determine the effectiveness of the NDFA in other settings than the geriatric medicine outpatient 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.