ArticleScientific reports2025
Development and indirect validation of a model predicting frailty in the French healthcare claims database.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Advancing healthcare allocation and prevention of disability: the role of disease-based predictive model for disability in aging adults.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Population-based validation of a frailty index using electronic regional healthcare records for public health use.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to build a predictive model to identify frailty in the French national health data system (SNDS) so as to create a new tool to monitor and anticipate the disability burden associated with population ageing. We developed the model using the 2012 wave of the French Health, Healthcare, and Insurance Survey (ESPS) linked to the SNDS (n = 2,829). This survey used Fried's frailty phenotype as the gold standard. We compared two statistical approaches - logistic regressions (stepwise and LASSO selection) and random forest - to predict frailty probability based on different SNDS healthcare claims. We indirectly validated the model by comparing (1) the predicted frailty prevalence in the overall French population in the SNDS with the expected prevalence and (2) the predictive ability of the model for 6-year mortality with that of Fried's frailty phenotype. Logistic regression with LASSO selection was retained as the best method to predict frailty. After stratification for age, we obtained three models for individuals aged 55-64, 65-74, and ≥ 75 years (AUC = 0.61, 0.76, and 0.80 respectively). Applying these models to the SNDS, frailty prevalence was comparable to expected prevalence in all sex and age groups: overall prevalence = 12.9% (95%CI: 12.9-12.9) in the SNDS versus 12.0% (95%CI: 10.8-13.2) in the ESPS. Predicted frailty probabilities in the SNDS showed a similar strong association with 6-year mortality (HR
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.