ArticleBMC geriatrics2025
Prognostic value of frailty across age groups in emergency department patients aged 65 and above.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Efficacy of Abdominal Massage Combined With Moxibustion for Treatment of Chronic Constipation in Elderly Patients.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2026Trial
- Association between hobby engagement and frailty among adults aged 65 years and older in 15 countries: findings from four prospective cohort studies.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- The interaction between frailty and patient characteristics and its association with hospital-related adverse events in older adults.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- A simplified clinical frailty scale predicts mortality in emergency department patients with acute dyspnea.GeroScience · 2026Article
- Risk Stratification for In-Hospital Mortality in Alzheimer's Disease Using Interpretable Regression and Explainable AI.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Clinical frailty score for hospital outcome for patients aged ≥ 75 following emergency department resuscitation room admission: a retrospective monocenter study.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is widely utilized for risk stratification in emergency departments (EDs); however, its predictive value across various age groups remains unclear.
methodsIn this retrospective multicenter study, we analyzed 6,310 patients in the ED aged ≥ 65 years, categorized into young-old (65-74 years, n = 2,750), middle-old (75-84 years, n = 2,400), and old-old (≥ 85 years, n = 1,160) groups. According to CFS, patients were categorized as robust (scores 1-3), pre-frail (score 4), or frail (scores 5-9). Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the independent association between frailty categories and clinical outcomes (ICU admission and in-hospital mortality), adjusting for age, sex, and illness severity. Predictive performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).
resultsThe predictive value of CFS varied significantly across age groups. In the young-old group, frail status was independently associated with increased ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.076-2.062) and in-hospital mortality (aOR 3.232, 95% CI 1.738-6.009). The middle-old group demonstrated the strongest relationship with mortality for frail patients (aOR 5.361, 95% CI 2.872-10.007), but no significant association with ICU admission after adjustment. In the old-old group, neither pre-frail nor frail status significantly predicted outcomes. AUROC analysis showed the highest discriminative capability for ICU admission in the young-old group (0.616, 95% CI 0.597-0.634) and for mortality in the middle-old group (0.730, 95% CI 0.712-0.748), with reduced predictive value observed in the old-old group.
conclusionsThe prognostic value of CFS varies significantly by age group, demonstrating the strongest performance in young-old patients and diminishing predictive value in the old-old group. These findings suggest the need for age-specific frailty assessment strategies in emergency care, with additional clinical indicators potentially necessary for risk stratification in the oldest patients. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.