The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The frailty phenotype and the frailty index: different instruments for different purposes
Open accessAbstract
The integration of frailty measures in clinical practice is crucial for the development of interventions against disabling conditions in older persons. The frailty phenotype (proposed and validated by Fried and colleagues in the Cardiovascular Health Study) and the Frailty Index (proposed and validated by Rockwood and colleagues in the Canadian Study of Health and Aging) represent the most known operational definitions of frailty in older persons. Unfortunately, they are often wrongly considered as alternatives and/or substitutables. These two instruments are indeed very different and should rather be considered as complementary. In the present paper, we discuss about the designs and rationals of the two instruments, proposing the correct ways for having them implemented in the clinical setting.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Frailty in Older Adults: Evidence for a Phenotype
Fried, L. P., Tangen, C. M., Walston, J., Newman, A. B., Hirsch, C., Gottdiener, J., Seeman, T., Tracy, R., Kop, W. J., Burke, G., et al. (2001) · The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences · doi:10.1093/gerona/56.3.m146 · Cited by 24,907
Clegg, A., Young, J., Iliffe, S., Rikkert, M. O., & Rockwood, K. (2013) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(12)62167-9 · Cited by 9,503
A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people
Rockwood, K. (2005) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.050051 · Cited by 8,968
A comparison of two approaches to measuring frailty in elderly people
Rockwood, K., Andrew, M., & Mitnitski, A. (2007) · The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences · doi:10.1093/gerona/62.7.738 · Cited by 1,291
Frailty is associated with incident Alzheimer's disease and cognitive decline in the elderly
Buchman, A. S., Boyle, P. A., Wilson, R. S., Tang, Y., & Bennett, D. A. (2007) · Psychosomatic Medicine · doi:10.1097/psy.0b013e318068de1d · Cited by 420
Cited by
The Asia-Pacific Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Frailty
Dent, E., Lien, C., Lim, W. S., Wong, W. C., Wong, C. H., Ng, T. P., Woo, J., Dong, B., de la Vega, S., Hua Poi, P. J., et al. (2017) · Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2017.04.018 · Cited by 631
Self-citationGut Microbiota, Muscle Mass and Function in Aging: A Focus on Physical Frailty and Sarcopenia
Ticinesi, A., Nouvenne, A., Cerundolo, N., Catania, P., Prati, B., Tana, C., & Meschi, T. (2019) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu11071633 · Cited by 418
A genome‐wide association study of the frailty index highlights brain pathways in ageing
Atkins, J. L., Jylhävä, J., Pedersen, N. L., Magnusson, P. K., Lu, Y., Wang, Y., Hägg, S., Melzer, D., Williams, D. M., & Pilling, L. C. (2021) · Aging Cell · doi:10.1111/acel.13459 · Cited by 319
Beard, J. R., Si, Y., Liu, Z., Chenoweth, L., & Hanewald, K. (2022) · The Journals of Gerontology: Series A · doi:10.1093/gerona/glab226 · Cited by 259
Lozano-Montoya, I., Correa-Pérez, A., Abraha, I., Soiza, R. L., Cherubini, A., O'Mahony, D., & Cruz-Jentoft, A. J. (2017) · Clinical Interventions in Aging · doi:10.2147/cia.s132496 · Cited by 130
Metadata
- Authors
- Cesari, M., Gambassi, G., Abellan van Kan, G., & Vellas, B.
- Venue
- Age and Ageing
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-10-16
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 10-12
- ISSN
- 0002-0729 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2834
- OpenAlex
- W2155858865
- Cited by
- 817
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 14.61
- Type
- journal article
- 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: The frailty phenotype and the frailty index: different instruments for different purposes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/ageing/aft160
- The paper
- Cesari, M., Gambassi, G., Abellan van Kan, G., & Vellas, B. (2014). The frailty phenotype and the frailty index: different instruments for different purposes. Age and Ageing. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/aft160
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.
