ArticleJMIR formative research2026
Agreement Between a Mobile Self-Administered Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment Screening Tool and Geriatrician-Administered Assessment: Cross-Sectional Feasibility Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is a widely recommended, multidimensional approach for guiding clinical decision-making and management in older adults. However, its implementation remains limited by a shortage of geriatric specialists, the complexity of geriatric care, and the increasing demands of an aging population. Mobile self-administered tools offer a potential strategy to expand access to multidimensional geriatric evaluation, particularly in resource-limited settings. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and agreement of a mobile self-administered CGA screening tool compared with geriatrician-administered assessments among inpatient and outpatient older adults in Brazil. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 80 older adults recruited from inpatient and outpatient geriatric clinics in Brasília, Brazil. Participants completed a mobile CGA, which incorporated validated instruments covering functional status (Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 [VES-13]), cognition (Cognitive Change Questionnaire-8 [CCQ-8]), depressive symptoms (5-item Geriatric Depression Scale [GDS-5]), nutritional status (Mini Nutritional Assessment [MNA]), frailty (G8 screening tool), social support (Gijón Scale), falls, and vision and hearing. Within 48 hours, a geriatrician independently performed a geriatrician-administered CGA using the same instruments. Agreement between the 2 assessment methods was evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, Spearman correlation coefficients, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and Cohen κ coefficients for categorical variables. Results: Participants had a mean age of 70 (SD 7) years; 58.8% (47/80) were female, and 65% (52/80) had ≤8 years of education. The mean completion time for the self-administered CGA was 18.5 (SD 7.5) minutes. Most participants rated the tool as easy or very easy to use (65/80, 81.3%) and reported satisfaction with the assessment process (n=79, 98.8%). High concordance was observed between the self-administered and geriatrician-administered CGA versions for most domains. Cohen κ coefficients demonstrated strong agreement for falls (κ=0.878; Conclusions: A mobile self-administered CGA demonstrated good feasibility, high user satisfaction, and substantial agreement with geriatrician-administered assessments across multiple geriatric domains. The tool may support geriatric screening and triage in settings with limited specialist availability, particularly when used as a complement to comprehensive clinical assessment.
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.