SynthesisBMC geriatrics2025
The diagnostic and predictive accuracy of the PRISMA-7 screening tool for frailty in older adults: a systematic review, and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFrailty is associated with adverse outcomes in older adults across healthcare settings. Frailty screening tools can serve to identify older adults living with frailty and direct resources to high-risk older adults. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the diagnostic and predictive accuracy of the Program of Research to Integrate the Services for the Maintenance of Autonomy 7 (PRISMA-7) frailty screening tool.
methodsA systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, EBSCO and the Cochrane Library. Prospective or retrospective cohort and cross-sectional studies that explored the diagnostic and/or predictive accuracy of the PRISMA-7 tool in older adults were included across all healthcare settings. Study quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Statistical analysis was completed using Stata version 12 (StataCorp, TX, USA). A bivariate random effects model was used to generate pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity. RevMan5 was used to pool data comparing older adults living with frailty versus those without frailty.
resultsThirty-six studies were included in the review. The overall quality of the studies included was moderate. Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy (regardless of reference standard used) showed a pooled sensitivity and specificity of 72% (95% CI 54-84%) and 87% (95% CI 76-93%), respectively. Sub-analysis of the six studies that used Frailty Phenotype as a reference standard demonstrated pooled sensitivity and specificity of 82% (95% CI 73.8-88.2) and 79% (95% CI 72-85.6%), respectively. Meta-analysis of the predictive accuracy of the PRISMA-7 showed that older adults living with frailty spent significantly more time in the emergency department (FEM MD 2.66 h, 95% CI 2.15-3.16 h, I
conclusionThe PRISMA-7 has a moderate sensitivity and high specificity for frailty identification. It has good predictive accuracy for multiple adverse outcomes among older adults, supporting its potential utilization across healthcare settings.
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.