ArticleAging clinical and experimental research2025
Comparison of novel and traditional anthropometric indices: which is the best indicator of frailty in older adults?
Article in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFrailty is a critical geriatric syndrome associated with adverse health outcomes and exhibits a complex relationship with obesity. Traditional anthropometrics, such as body mass index (BMI), inadequately assess obesity-related risks in the aging population. Emerging indices better capture visceral adiposity, potentially enhancing frailty prediction. This study evaluates these indices' associations with frailty in older adults.
methodsThis study analyzed existing data collected between 2002 and 2007 as part of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). BMI, body roundness index (BRI), a body shape index (ABSI), waist-to-height ratio (WHtR), and waist/height0.5 (WHT·5R) were calculated using waist circumference, weight, and height. We used a modified frailty index (FI) with 36 standardized parameters to quantify the severity of frailty by the cumulative proportion of deficits.
resultsIn the adjusted model, increases in all indices except ABSI were statistically significantly associated with increases in FI (BRI: β(95%CI) = 0.004(0.003, 0.005); BMI: β(95%CI) = 0.001(0.0001, 0.001); ABSI: β(95%CI) = 2.034(1.627, 2.440); WHtR: β(95%CI) = 0.093(0.067, 0.119); WHT·5R: β(95%CI) = 0.007(0.005,0.009)). Bootstrap analysis showed that BRI had a greater impact on FI than BMI (difference = 0.0019), while WHtR and WHT·5R had a stronger impact on FI than BRI (difference = -0.0746 and -0.0027, respectively). The effect of WHtR on FI was significantly higher than that of WHT·5R (difference = 0.0719).
conclusionThis study highlighted that WHtR was more strongly associated with FI than BMI, BRI, and WHT·5R, and highlighted the priority of waist-centered obesity measures in frailty risk assessment and clinical intervention in the elderly.
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.