Frailty in rheumatoid arthritis and the general population: A cross-sectional analysis of the Groningen Frailty Indicator and Fried criteria

Clicks: 3
ID: 317630
2026
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
Emerging

Ranked #124 of 206 articles by views in Lara D. Veeken

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 206 in total.

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
Abstract Objective To compare frailty prevalence and factors driving frailty between older adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and controls, using two conceptually distinct frailty instruments. Methods Cross-sectional data from the STudying Ageing in Rheumatoid arthritis (STAR) study were used, including 207 patients with RA and 214 population controls aged 55-85 years. Frailty was assessed using the Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI; 15 yes/no items; physical, cognitive, social, psychological domains; frail≥4/15) in all participants and the Fried criteria (5 yes/no items; physical domain; prefrail=1-2, frail≥3, and combined frail/prefrail≥1 deficit) in a clinically assessed subgroup (RA: n = 88, controls: n = 96). Prevalence and overlap between instruments were described by group. Uni- and multivariable logistic (GFI: frailty vs. robust) and Poisson (Fried: frail/prefrail vs. robust) regressions assessed effects of age, group, the age*group interaction, and additional covariates. Results Frailty prevalence was higher in RA than controls for GFI-frailty (34% vs 18%) and Fried-frailty/prefrailty (72% vs 50%). Among GFI-frail persons, 88% of patients with RA compared to 69% of controls were also frail or prefrail by Fried. Age was not associated with frailty in uni- or multivariable analyses for either instrument, in RA or controls (p interaction age*group>0.10). The association with RA became insignificant after multivariable adjustment. Living alone, comorbidity score ≥1, higher fatigue, and anxiety were associated with GFI-frailty, and higher BMI and poorer physical function with Fried- frailty/prefrailty. Conclusion Older adults with RA show higher (pre)frailty prevalence than controls, which is associated with disease-related consequences and vulnerability rather than age, questioning the added value of frailty assessment beyond routine clinical evaluation.
Reference Key
openalex_W7165037056 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Saskia P M Truijen, Annelies Boonen, Sofia Ramiro, Marloes van Onna
Journal Lara D. Veeken
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/rheumatology/keag310
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keag310
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.