ReviewFrontiers in medicine2026
Frailty: from concept to clinical practice in urology.
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Failty refers to a state of vulnerability to stressors caused by declines in physiological reserve across multiple systems and is associated with adverse health outcomes. Despite its established importance in medical specialties, frailty assessment remains inconsistently implemented in urology. The aim of this review was to provide an overview of the concept of frailty and summarise the current evidence regarding its relevance to urological practice. Methods: A narrative literature review was performed using PubMed/MEDLINE and Google Scholar. Articles relating to frailty, geriatric and perioperative care, surgical outcomes, and urology were identified and reviewed. Findings were synthesised to provide a clinical overview relevant to healthcare professionals working in urological settings. Results: Frailty is common among older adults and is increasingly recognised as a marker of vulnerability beyond chronological age alone. Multiple validated assessment tools are available, including the Clinical Frailty Scale and Frailty Index, although no single instrument has demonstrated clear superiority. Existing evidence suggests that frailty is associated with higher rates of postoperative complications, mortality, prolonged hospitalisation, and increased healthcare utilisation in urological patients. Studies further indicate that comprehensive geriatric assessment may identify potentially modifiable risk factors and support frailty-informed care pathways. While most published data relate to elective uro-oncological surgery, emerging evidence from acute urology suggests that integration of geriatric services may improve outcomes such as length of stay and hospital readmission. Conclusions: Frailty is highly relevant to contemporary urological practice and appears to be a stronger predictor of adverse outcomes than chronological age alone. Routine frailty assessment using simple validated tools may enhance risk stratification, perioperative planning, and shared decision-making. Wider implementation of frailty-informed care pathways and greater incorporation of frailty measures into urological research should be prioritised as the population ages.
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.