ArticleAustralasian journal on ageing2026
How Frailty Is Considered, Measured and Managed in Clinical Practice, Quality Improvement and Research in Australia: Insights From a National Survey.
Article in Australasian journal on ageing, 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study investigated the extent to which frailty is currently considered, measured and managed in clinical practice, quality improvement and research in Australia.
methodsA cross-sectional electronic survey was developed and promoted to clinicians, health service managers and researchers involved in the provision or study of health care for older people across Australia (August 2024 to March 2025).
resultsOf the 155 responses analysed, 88% (n = 136) were from clinicians. Over half of the respondents, 57% (n = 55/97) reported that frailty screening occurred regularly in their health service. Screening was performed by clinicians with allied health, nursing and medical backgrounds, with the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) the tool reported most commonly (61%). Free text responses indicated that although frailty screening often informed individual clinical care, system-level models of care to manage people who were screened as frail were rare. Respondents viewed management of frailty as the most important research area (management 41%, prevention 34%, screening 25%). Free text responses on priority research questions highlighted knowledge and implementation gaps in all domains. Of those who responded to the question on research (n = 154), 75% indicated that there was no ongoing research on frailty in their health service and 43% indicated willingness to be involved in frailty research.
conclusionsFrailty screening in practice was reported by over half of the respondents, with opportunities identified to implement models of care for patients with frailty. There is an appetite for further research on frailty in health services across Australia, with management of frailty a priority.
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.