↓ Skip to main content

Derivation of a frailty index from the resident assessment instrument – home care adapted for Switzerland: a study based on retrospective data analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 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
Derivation of a frailty index from the resident assessment instrument – home care adapted for Switzerland: a study based on retrospective data analysis
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12877-017-0604-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine Ludwig, Catherine Busnel

Abstract

The screening of frail individuals at risk for functional health decline and adverse health outcomes lies in the evolving agenda of home care providers. Such a screening can be based on a frailty index (FI) derived from data collected with interRAI instruments used in clinical routines to define care plans. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of deriving an FI from the Resident Assessment Instrument - Home Care adapted for Switzerland (Swiss RAI-HC). Data were collected by the Geneva Institution for Homecare and Assistance in clinical routines. The sample consisted of 3714 individuals aged 65 or older (67.7% females) who had each received a Swiss RAI-HC upon admission in the year of 2015. The FI was derived from 52 variables identified and scored according to published guidelines. Adverse health outcomes were either assessed during follow-up assessments (falls, hospitalizations) or documented from administrative records (mortality). The results showed that the FI was distributed normally, with a mean of 0.24 (± 0.13), an interquartile range of 0.16, and values of 0.04 at percentile 1 and 0.63 at percentile 99. The effect of Age was significant (R(2) = 0.011) with a slope of β = 0.002, 95% CI = [0.001-0.002]. Sex as well as the Age × Sex interaction were not significant. The FI predicted deaths (OR = 9.99, 95% CI = [3.20-29.99]), hospitalizations (OR = 3.40, 95% CI = [1.78-6.32]), and falls (OR = 5.00, 95% CI = [2.68-9.38]). The results support the feasibility of an FI derivation from the Swiss RAI-HC, hence replicating previous demonstrations based on interRAI instruments. The results also replicated findings showing that the FI is a good predictor of adverse health outcomes. Yet, the results suggest that home care recipients demonstrate a frailty pattern different from the one reported in community dwellers but comparable to clinical samples. Further work is needed to assess the characteristics of the proposed index in community-dwelling, non-clinical samples for comparability with the existing literature and external validation TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03139162 . Retrospectively registered May 2, 2017.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Master 8 11%
Researcher 6 8%
Other 5 7%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 26 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 14 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 15%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Computer Science 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 29 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 November 2017.
All research outputs
#7,697,099
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#1,820
of 3,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,774
of 316,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#32
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,201 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 316,596 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.