ArticleBMC geriatrics2026
Identifying sex-specific predictors of frailty in Korean community-dwelling older adults using interpretable machine learning.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2026. 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
Abstract
backgroundFrailty is a common geriatric syndrome associated with increased risk of adverse health outcomes, highlighting the need for early identification and appropriate management. Although machine learning (ML) models have shown promise in classifying frailty, research on sex-specific classification performance and its contributing factors remains limited.
objectiveThis study aimed to develop sex-specific interpretable ML classification models and identify sex-specific contributors to frailty using the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP).
methodsA total of 1,540 community-dwelling older adults (mean age 76.2 ± 3.8 years; women 48.6%) from the Korean Frailty and Aging Cohort Study were included. Frailty status was assessed using the Fried Frailty Phenotype and classified into frail and robust groups. Sex-specific ML models were developed using 73 variables across 8 domains. Model performance was evaluated using stratified cross-validation, and SHAP analysis was applied to interpret feature contributions and explore sex differences in frailty-related factors.
resultsSex-specific ML models demonstrated high performance in frailty classification. The best model for males was logistic regression (F1-score: 0.89; accuracy: 0.94), whereas for females, both logistic regression and XGBoost achieved F1-scores of 0.92 and accuracy of 0.95. The SHAP analysis revealed sex-specific key predictors, with physical, biological, and psychological indicators being the most influential.
conclusionsThe sex-specific frailty prediction models developed in this study demonstrated outstanding performance and revealed sex-dependent differences in key predictive factors, thereby providing an essential foundation for the development of personalized prevention and management strategies.
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.