Cited by 97Frailty in Older AdultsChronic Disease Management StrategiesPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes

Frailty Thy Name Is ... Phrailty?

Open access
Whitson, H. E., Purser, J. L., Cohen, H. J.·2007·The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences

Abstract

THE precise characterization of frailty as a state of physiologic vulnerability has been extremely useful for research (1,2). In particular, the frailty index first validated in the Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS) is a reliable predictor of adverse outcomes and a valuable and versatile tool (3–7). In contrast, conceptualizing frailty as physiologic vulnerability can be problematic, partly because clinicians typically apply the word “frail” to functionally limited or even overtly disabled elders who are suffering the cumulative effects of disease-related, psychosocial, and environmental challenges (8–13). Thus, the research definition creates cognitive dissonance because it does not fully equate to what many physicians have in mind when they envision a frail elder (Figure 1). If a state of pure physiologic vulnerability exists, perhaps we should call it “phrailty” (physiologic frailty), with “F–frailty” (full-blown functional frailty) reserved for multifactorial vulnerability that is accompanied by functional limitations and almost always reflects comorbidities as well as environmental and psychosocial interactions. To be clear, we introduce this terminology to make a point and are not proposing that the field should actually adopt new vocabulary. After all, if phrailty in the most extreme sense refers to physiologic vulnerability before any apparent clinical manifestations, it would be impossible to identify phrail patients for observation and study, and the definition would have little practical utility. For the sake of discussion, however, let us imagine phrailty and F-frailty as overlapping states within a spectrum that encompasses both the research definition, which relies heavily on physiologic compromise, and a more traditional notion of frailty, which takes into account functional limitations and external factors such as environment and social support (Figure 2).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/gerona/62.7.728

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Whitson, H. E., Purser, J. L., & Cohen, H. J.
Affiliations
Duke Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Whitson, H. E.
Venue
The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences
Published
2007-07-01
Volume
62
Issue
7
Pages
728-730
ISSN
  • 1079-5006 (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-535X
OpenAlex
W2159781752
Cited by
97
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 8
FWCI
3.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journals of Gerontology Series A (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (P30AG028716)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K01HD049593)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Keywords
frailty, frailty index, functional limitations, comorbidities, older adults
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Humans, Frail Elderly

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