Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,114

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 115 of the 115 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital

Open access
Ellis, Graham, Whitehead, Martin A, O'Neill, Desmond, Langhorne, Peter, Robinson, David·2011·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is a multidimensional, interdisciplinary diagnostic process to determine the medical, psychological and functional capabilities of a frail elderly person in order to develop a co-ordinated and integrated plan for treatment and long-term follow up. OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of CGA in hospital for older adults admitted as an emergency. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and AARP Ageline, and handsearched high-yield journals. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised controlled trials comparing CGA (whether by mobile teams or in designated wards) to usual care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors initially assessed eligibility and trial quality and extracted published data. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-two trials evaluating 10,315 participants in six countries were identified. Patients in receipt of CGA were more likely to be alive and in their own homes at up to six months (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.42, P = 0.0002) and at the end of scheduled follow up (median 12 months) (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.28, P = 0.003) when compared to general medical care. In addition, patients were less likely to be institutionalised (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.88, P < 0.0001). They were less likely to suffer death or deterioration (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.90, P = 0.001), and were more likely to experience improved cognition in the CGA group (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.20 to 2.01, P = 0.02). Subgroup interaction in the primary outcomes suggests that the effects of CGA are primarily the result of CGA wards. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive geriatric assessment increases a patient's likelihood of being alive and in their own home at up to 12 months.

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 · 10.1002/14651858.cd006211.pub2

Cites

115 of 115 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 115 references

Cited by

See all 1,114

Metadata

Authors
Ellis, G., Whitehead, M. A., O'Neill, D., Langhorne, P., & Robinson, D.
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Published
2011-07-06
Volume
9
Issue
7
Pages
CD006211-CD006211
ISSN
1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2138967628
Cited by
1,114
References
115
Type
reference entry
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd006211.pub2
The paper
Ellis, G., Whitehead, M. A., O'Neill, D., Langhorne, P., & Robinson, D. (2011). Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd006211.pub2

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.