↓ Skip to main content

Development and validation of the FRAGIRE tool for assessment an older person’s risk for frailty

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Development and validation of the FRAGIRE tool for assessment an older person’s risk for frailty
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12877-016-0360-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dewi Vernerey, Amelie Anota, Pierre Vandel, Sophie Paget-Bailly, Michele Dion, Vanessa Bailly, Marie Bonin, Astrid Pozet, Audrey Foubert, Magdalena Benetkiewicz, Patrick Manckoundia, Franck Bonnetain

Abstract

Frailty is highly prevalent in elderly people. While significant progress has been made to understand its pathogenesis process, few validated questionnaire exist to assess the multidimensional concept of frailty and to detect people frail or at risk to become frail. The objectives of this study were to construct and validate a new frailty-screening instrument named Frailty Groupe Iso-Ressource Evaluation (FRAGIRE) that accurately predicts the risk for frailty in older adults. A prospective multicenter recruitment of the elderly patients was undertaken in France. The subjects were classified into financially-helped group (FH, with financial assistance) and non-financially helped group (NFH, without any financial assistance), considering FH subjects are more frail than the NFH group and thus representing an acceptable surrogate population for frailty. Psychometric properties of the FRAGIRE grid were assessed including discrimination between the FH and NFH groups. Items reduction was made according to statistical analyses and experts' point of view. The association between items response and tests with "help requested status" was assessed in univariate and multivariate unconditional logistic regression analyses and a prognostic score to become frail was finally proposed for each subject. Between May 2013 and July 2013, 385 subjects were included: 338 (88%) in the FH group and 47 (12%) in the NFH group. The initial FRAGIRE grid included 65 items. After conducting the item selection, the final grid of the FRAGIRE was reduced to 19 items. The final grid showed fair discrimination ability to predict frailty (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.85) and good calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow P-value = 0.580), reflecting a good agreement between the prediction by the final model and actual observation. The Cronbach's alpha for the developed tool scored as high as 0.69 (95% Confidence Interval: 0.64 to 0.74). The final prognostic score was excellent, with an AUC of 0.756. Moreover, it facilitated significant separation of patients into individuals requesting for help from others (P-value < 0.0001), with sensitivity of 81%, specificity of 61%, positive predictive value of 93%, negative predictive value of 34%, and a global predictive value of 78%. The FRAGIRE seems to have considerable potential as a reliable and effective tool for identifying frail elderly individuals by a public health social worker without medical training.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 44 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 16%
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 10 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 11%
Psychology 4 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 11 24%
Unknown 12 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 December 2016.
All research outputs
#4,010,473
of 8,800,428 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#579
of 928 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,608
of 300,150 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#39
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,800,428 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 53rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 928 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,150 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.