ReviewUrology annals
Frailty scoring systems in urological surgery: Current status and future perspectives.
Review in Urology annals. 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.
- Frailty: from concept to clinical practice in urology.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- The geriatric trifecta in benign urological surgery: An EAU endourology perspective on defining surgical success in older adults.Central European journal of urology · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Frailty refers to a state of increased vulnerability and is recognised to be multifactorial. It is associated with a higher likelihood for functional dependency and a reduced life expectancy. In the surgical setting, frailty has attracted increased attention in regard to how it can impact post-operative outcomes. Many research groups have explored ways to translate frailty into a clinical marker and represent it as a quantifiable measurement. To this end, there now exist a plethora of tools (over 50 tools) available that have been applied in a clinical and/or research setting across nearly all medical and surgical specialities. However, the large number of tools can make it challenging for clinicians to know which one to adopt. This article provides an overview of the commonly used tools in urological surgery. Most tools have been studied in the context of urological cancer surgery and consistently show that frailty is associated with poorer outcomes. Of note, none of the systems described were developed exclusively for purely urological studies. Many of the abovementioned systems require a face-to-face assessment and therefore preclude retrospective data collection. Frail patients may not therefore be eligible on account of either one of these and it may account for why research in this field is lacking. Important outcomes such as the discharge location and how ADLs have changed are also challenging to collect retrospectively. Further research should focus on developing a frailty scoring system that is customised for urological surgeries.
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.