ArticleBMC geriatrics2026
Development and validation of an oral frailty assessment tool for older adults based on the COSMIN risk of bias checklist: a cross-sectional study.
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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOral frailty is a key determinant of older adults’ health, functional independence, and quality of life. However, its core elements and interrelationships lack clear systematic conceptualization, and existing domestic and international assessment tools suffer from generalized scoring, unclear reliability and validity, and insufficient cross-cultural applicability—failing to accurately reflect the oral frailty status of Chinese older adults. Thus, this study aimed to develop and validate an oral frailty assessment tool for Chinese older adults based on a conceptual framework that we previously constructed.
methodsThe scale construction and validation methods adhere to COSMIN risk of bias checklist. The scale dimensions and items were refined and revised through the Delphi expert consultation method. Then a cross-sectional survey of older adults was subsequently conducted via convenience sampling in three stages. First, item analysis and screening were conducted. Second, reliability and validity were calculated. Finally, the area under the curve, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated with the FRAIL scale as the standard, and the cutoff value for the scale was determined.
resultsThis study developed the Chinese geriatrics oral frailty assessment scale scored on a 5-point Likert scale, comprising dimensions of masticatory function, swallowing function, dry mouth status, and psychosocial status. The Cronbach’s α coefficient of the scale was 0.832. The cumulative variance contribution of 79.307%; confirmatory factor model fit indices χ²/df = 2.394, RMSEA = 0.081, GFI = 0.943, AGFI = 0.889, NFI = 0.940, IFI = 0.964, CFI = 0.964, RFI = 0.904, TLI = 0.942; all AVE > 0.5, all CR > 0.7, and the square root of AVE is greater than the correlation coefficient between the factors; all I-CVI > 0.78, S-CVI = 0.96. The area under the curve was 0.837 (95% CI: 0.723–0.951). The cutoff value for the scale was 16.5, indicating that a score of ≥ 17 indicated oral frailty.
conclusionThe assessment scale for oral frailty in older adults developed in this study is simple to use, has good reliability and validity, and is expected to be a significant tool for assessing oral frailty in older adults in China.
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.