Frailty index as a predictor of mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Clicks: 1
ID: 304459
2017
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #44 of 50 articles by views in age and ageing

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
two popular operational definitions of frailty, the frailty phenotype and Frailty index (FI), are based on different theories. Although FI was shown to be superior in predicting mortality to the frailty phenotype, no meta-analysis on mortality risk according to FI has been found in the literature.an electronic systematic literature search was conducted in August 2016 using four databases (Embase, Medline, CINAHL and PsycINFO) for prospective cohort studies published in 2000 or later, examining the mortality risk according to frailty measured by FI. A meta-analysis was performed to synthesise pooled mortality risk estimates.of 2,617 studies identified by the systematic review, 18 cohorts from 19 studies were included. Thirteen cohorts showed hazard ratios (HRs) per 0.01 increase in FI, six cohorts showed HRs per 0.1 increase in FI and two cohorts each showed odds ratios (ORs) per 0.01 and 0.1 increase in FI, respectively. All meta-analyses suggested that higher FI was significantly associated with higher mortality risk (pooled HR per 0.01 FI increase = 1.039, 95% CI = 1.033-1.044, P < 0.001; pooled HR per 0.1 FI increase = 1.282, 95% CI = 1.258-1.307, P < 0.001; pooled OR per 0.01 FI increase = 1.054, 95% CI = 1.040-1.068, P < 0.001; pooled OR per 0.1 FI increase = 1.706, 95% CI = 1.547-1.881, P < 0.001). Meta-regression analysis among 13 cohorts with HR per 0.01 increase in FI showed that the studies with shorter follow-up periods and with lower female proportion were associated with higher mortality risks by FI.this systematic review and meta-analysis was the first to quantitatively demonstrate that frailty measured by the FI is a significant predictor of mortality.
Reference Key
openalex_W2762852445 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Gotaro Kojima, Steve Iliffe, Kate Walters
Journal age and ageing
Year 2017
DOI
10.1093/ageing/afx162
URL
https://academic.oup.com/ageing/article-pdf/47/2/193/24140683/afx162.pdf
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.