The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Development and validation of an electronic frailty index using routine primary care electronic health record data
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: frailty is an especially problematic expression of population ageing. International guidelines recommend routine identification of frailty to provide evidence-based treatment, but currently available tools require additional resource. OBJECTIVES: to develop and validate an electronic frailty index (eFI) using routinely available primary care electronic health record data. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: retrospective cohort study. Development and internal validation cohorts were established using a randomly split sample of the ResearchOne primary care database. External validation cohort established using THIN database. PARTICIPANTS: patients aged 65-95, registered with a ResearchOne or THIN practice on 14 October 2008. PREDICTORS: we constructed the eFI using the cumulative deficit frailty model as our theoretical framework. The eFI score is calculated by the presence or absence of individual deficits as a proportion of the total possible. Categories of fit, mild, moderate and severe frailty were defined using population quartiles. OUTCOMES: outcomes were 1-, 3- and 5-year mortality, hospitalisation and nursing home admission. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using bivariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses. Discrimination was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Calibration was assessed using pseudo-R(2) estimates. RESULTS: we include data from a total of 931,541 patients. The eFI incorporates 36 deficits constructed using 2,171 CTV3 codes. One-year adjusted HR for mortality was 1.92 (95% CI 1.81-2.04) for mild frailty, 3.10 (95% CI 2.91-3.31) for moderate frailty and 4.52 (95% CI 4.16-4.91) for severe frailty. Corresponding estimates for hospitalisation were 1.93 (95% CI 1.86-2.01), 3.04 (95% CI 2.90-3.19) and 4.73 (95% CI 4.43-5.06) and for nursing home admission were 1.89 (95% CI 1.63-2.15), 3.19 (95% CI 2.73-3.73) and 4.76 (95% CI 3.92-5.77), with good to moderate discrimination but low calibration estimates. CONCLUSIONS: the eFI uses routine data to identify older people with mild, moderate and severe frailty, with robust predictive validity for outcomes of mortality, hospitalisation and nursing home admission. Routine implementation of the eFI could enable delivery of evidence-based interventions to improve outcomes for this vulnerable 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.
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
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2025) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 352,181
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
Self-citationA 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
Frailty Consensus: A Call to Action
Morley, J. E., Vellas, B., Abellan van Kan, G., Anker, S. D., Bauer, J. M., Bernabei, R., Cesari, M., Chumlea, W. C., Doehner, W., Evans, J., et al. (2013) · Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2013.03.022 · Cited by 4,043
A standard procedure for creating a frailty index
Searle, S. D., Mitnitski, A., Gahbauer, E. A., Gill, T. M., & Rockwood, K. (2008) · BMC Geriatrics · doi:10.1186/1471-2318-8-24 · Cited by 3,568
Accumulation of Deficits as a Proxy Measure of Aging
Mitnitski, A. B., Mogilner, A. J., & Rockwood, K. (2001) · The Scientific World JOURNAL · doi:10.1100/tsw.2001.58 · Cited by 2,893 · cited 2×
“As previous frailty indexes have been validated using non-weighted methods [8], our approach to development of the eFI was based on improper linear modelling techniques, whereby the weights of the predictor variables were assumed to be equal [17].”
BackgroundMethodThe robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making.
Dawes, R. M. (1979) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.34.7.571 · Cited by 1,966
Prevalence and 10‐Year Outcomes of Frailty in Older Adults in Relation to Deficit Accumulation
Song, X., Mitnitski, A., & Rockwood, K. (2010) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02764.x · Cited by 1,104 · cited 1×
“The original model was based on 92 variables, but subsequent work has shown that this can be reduced to a more manageable 30 or so without loss of predictive validity [9].”
MethodThe prevalence and outcomes of frailty in older cancer patients: a systematic review
Handforth, C., Clegg, A., Young, C., Simpkins, S., Seymour, M. T., Selby, P. J., & Young, J. (2015) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdu540 · Cited by 1,048
Self-citation
Cited by
Factors associated with COVID-19-related death using OpenSAFELY
Williamson, E. J., Walker, A. J., Bhaskaran, K., Bacon, S., Bates, C., Morton, C. E., Curtis, H. J., Mehrkar, A., Evans, D., Inglesby, P., et al. (2020) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2521-4 · Cited by 6,674
Self-citationFrailty: implications for clinical practice and public health
Hoogendijk, E. O., Afilalo, J., Ensrud, K. E., Kowal, P., Onder, G., & Fried, L. P. (2019) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(19)31786-6 · Cited by 3,282
2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of elevated blood pressure and hypertension
McEvoy, J. W., McCarthy, C. P., Bruno, R. M., Brouwers, S., Canavan, M. D., Ceconi, C., Christodorescu, R. M., Daskalopoulou, S. S., Ferro, C. J., Gerdts, E., et al. (2024) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehae178 · Cited by 2,298
Collaborative, T. O., Williamson, E., Walker, A. J., Bhaskaran, K., Bacon, S., Bates, C., Morton, C. E., Curtis, H. J., Mehrkar, A., Evans, D., et al. (2020) · doi:10.1101/2020.05.06.20092999 · Cited by 6,674
Self-citationDelaying and reversing frailty: a systematic review of primary care interventions
Travers, J., Romero-Ortuno, R., Bailey, J., & Cooney, M.-T. (2019) · British Journal of General Practice · doi:10.3399/bjgp18x700241 · Cited by 401
Metadata
- Authors
- Clegg, A., Bates, C., Young, J., Ryan, R., Nichols, L., Ann Teale, E., Mohammed, M. A., Parry, J., & Marshall, T.
- Venue
- Age and Ageing
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2016-03-03
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 353-360
- ISSN
- 0002-0729 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2834
- OpenAlex
- W2291720716
- Cited by
- 1,303
- References
- 18
- FWCI
- 42.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Development and validation of an electronic frailty index using routine primary care electronic health record data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/ageing/afw039
- The paper
- Clegg, A., Bates, C., Young, J., Ryan, R., Nichols, L., Ann Teale, E., Mohammed, M. A., Parry, J., & Marshall, T. (2016). Development and validation of an electronic frailty index using routine primary care electronic health record data. Age and Ageing. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afw039
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.