Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 493

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Superiority of Frailty Over Age in Predicting Outcomes Among Geriatric Trauma Patients: A Prospective Analysis

Joseph, Bellal, Pandit, Viraj, Zangbar, Bardiya, Kulvatunyou, Narong, Hashmi, Ammar, Green, Donald J., O’Keeffe, Terence, Tang, Andrew, Vercruysse, Gary, Fain, Mindy J., Friese, Randall S., Rhee, Peter·2014·JAMA Surgery
DOI 10.1001/jamasurg.2014.296
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: The Frailty Index (FI) is a known predictor of adverse outcomes in geriatric patients. The usefulness of the FI as an outcome measure in geriatric trauma patients is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the usefulness of the FI as an effective assessment tool in predicting adverse outcomes in geriatric trauma patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A 2-year (June 2011 to February 2013) prospective cohort study at a level I trauma center at the University of Arizona. We prospectively measured frailty in all geriatric trauma patients. Geriatric patients were defined as those 65 years or older. The FI was calculated using 50 preadmission frailty variables. Frailty in patients was defined by an FI of 0.25 or higher. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was in-hospital complications. The secondary outcome measure was adverse discharge disposition. In-hospital complications were defined as cardiac, pulmonary, infectious, hematologic, renal, and reoperation. Adverse discharge disposition was defined as discharge to a skilled nursing facility or in-hospital mortality. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between the FI and outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 250 patients were enrolled, with a mean (SD) age of 77.9 (8.1) years, median Injury Severity Score of 15 (range, 9-18), median Glasgow Coma Scale score of 15 (range, 12-15), and mean (SD) FI of 0.21 (0.10). Forty-four percent (n = 110) of patients had frailty. Patients with frailty were more likely to have in-hospital complications (odds ratio, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.5-6.0; P = .001) and adverse discharge disposition (odds ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.4; P = .001). The mortality rate was 2.0% (n = 5), and all patients who died had frailty. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The FI is an independent predictor of in-hospital complications and adverse discharge disposition in geriatric trauma patients. This index should be used as a clinical tool for risk stratification in this patient group.

Overview

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/jamasurg.2014.296

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 26 references

Cited by

See all 493

Metadata

Authors
Joseph, B., Pandit, V., Zangbar, B., Kulvatunyou, N., Hashmi, A., Green, D. J., O’Keeffe, T., Tang, A., Vercruysse, G., Fain, M. J., Friese, R. S., & Rhee, P.
Venue
JAMA Surgery
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2014-08-01
Volume
149
Issue
8
Pages
766
ISSN
2168-6254 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1001/jamasurg.2014.296
OpenAlex
W2000781359
Cited by
493
References
26
FWCI
18.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Superiority of Frailty Over Age in Predicting Outcomes Among Geriatric Trauma Patients: A Prospective Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jamasurg.2014.296
The paper
Joseph, B., Pandit, V., Zangbar, B., Kulvatunyou, N., Hashmi, A., Green, D. J., O’Keeffe, T., Tang, A., Vercruysse, G., Fain, M. J., Friese, R. S., & Rhee, P. (2014). Superiority of Frailty Over Age in Predicting Outcomes Among Geriatric Trauma Patients: A Prospective Analysis. JAMA Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2014.296

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.