Cited by 737Frailty in Older AdultsPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management

Prognostic Indices for Older Adults: A Systematic Review

Open access
Yourman, Lindsey C., Lee, Sei J., Schonberg, Mara A., Widera, Eric W., Smith, Alexander K.·2012·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: To better target services to those who may benefit, many guidelines recommend incorporating life expectancy into clinical decisions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality and limitations of prognostic indices for mortality in older adults through systematic review. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Google Scholar from their inception through November 2011. STUDY SELECTION: We included indices if they were validated and predicted absolute risk of mortality in patients whose average age was 60 years or older. We excluded indices that estimated intensive care unit, disease-specific, or in-hospital mortality. DATA EXTRACTION: For each prognostic index, we extracted data on clinical setting, potential for bias, generalizability, and accuracy. RESULTS: We reviewed 21,593 titles to identify 16 indices that predict risk of mortality from 6 months to 5 years for older adults in a variety of clinical settings: the community (6 indices), nursing home (2 indices), and hospital (8 indices). At least 1 measure of transportability (the index is accurate in more than 1 population) was tested for all but 3 indices. By our measures, no study was free from potential bias. Although 13 indices had C statistics of 0.70 or greater, none of the indices had C statistics of 0.90 or greater. Only 2 indices were independently validated by investigators who were not involved in the index's development. CONCLUSION: We identified several indices for predicting overall mortality in different patient groups; future studies need to independently test their accuracy in heterogeneous populations and their ability to improve clinical outcomes before their widespread use can be recommended.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2011.1966

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Mortality prediction models that account for variables such as comorbidities and functional status can serve as the basis for making more refined life expectancy estimates.

    “Mortality prediction models that account for variables such as comorbidities and functional status can serve as the basis for making more refined life expectancy estimates107–109.”

    From Diabetes in Older Adults: A Consensus Report (2012) · cites this paper as [107]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 74 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [51]Einhorn HJ Hogarth RM Bell DE Raiffa H Tversky A Behavioral decision theory: process of judgement and choice Decision-Making: Descriptive, Normative, and Prescriptive Interactions Cambridge, MA Cambridge University Press 1988 113 146

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yourman, L. C., Lee, S. J., Schonberg, M. A., Widera, E. W., & Smith, A. K.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • San Francisco VA Medical Center (US)
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Smith, Alexander K.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2012-01-11
Volume
307
Issue
2
Pages
182
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2025056766
Cited by
736
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 62 · 2018: 57 · 2017: 60 · 2016: 74 · 2015: 57 · 2014: 59 · 2013: 45 · 2012: 42
FWCI
31.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (K23AG040772, K23AG040779, T32AG000212)
  • National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR024131, KL2RR024130)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Insurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Keywords
prognostic score, mortality prediction, older adults, life expectancy, risk stratification, generalizability, transportability, index validation, concordance index, nursing homes, in-hospital mortality, community-dwelling older adults
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Decision Making, Patient Care, Humans, Life Expectancy, Middle Aged, Mortality, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, Risk

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review