ArticleThe Laryngoscope2025
Risk Analysis Index Versus Modified Frailty Index: Outcomes After Otolaryngologic Surgery.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk Analysis Index Versus mFI-5 for Predicting Outcomes After Uvulopalatopharyngoplasty.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Modified 5-Item Frailty Index Is Associated with Postoperative Delirium but Not Survival in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Risk Analysis Index Versus Modified Frailty Index: Outcomes After Otolaryngologic Surgery.The Laryngoscope · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePatient frailty negatively impacts postsurgical outcomes across multiple specialties. Commonly used frailty scoring systems include the Modified 5-Item Frailty Index (MFI-5) and the Clinical Risk Analysis Index (RAI-C). We compared these frailty indices in predicting postsurgical outcomes in otolaryngology, a comparison that has never been completed to date.
methodsRetrospective chart review of patients undergoing otolaryngologic surgery at a quaternary care medical center (2022-2024) with an RAI-C score available for analysis. Chi-square analysis and ROC curves were utilized to determine associations and predictive ability of each scoring system.
resultsAmong 1209 patients, 21% met MFI-5 frailty criteria (MFI-5 score > 1), and 23% met RAI-C frailty criteria (RAI-C score > 30). The Pearson correlation coefficient between MFI-5 and RAI-C was 0.481 (95% CI [0.43, 0.53]), indicating a moderate correlation between the two metrics. Patients deemed frail by RAI-C had 5.7 times higher odds of experiencing a postoperative complication than non-frail counterparts (95% CI [3.51, 9.28], p < 0.0001), but MFI-5 frailty status was not associated with postoperative complications. Both RAI-C and MFI-5 demonstrated significant predictive ability for 30-day readmission (AUC 0.77, 95% CI [0.64, 0.89] vs. AUC 0.76, 95% CI [0.61, 0.88]), respectively. When compared to MFI-5, RAI-C had greater predictive performance for all other postoperative outcomes in this study.
conclusionRAI-C outperformed MFI-5 in predicting postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing otolaryngologic surgeries. RAI-C assessment should be considered in frailty research, multidisciplinary treatment planning, and managing patient expectations and outcomes.
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.