The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Predictive Validity of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator: Disability, Health Care Utilization, and Quality of Life in a Population at Risk
Open accessAbstract
PURPOSE: To assess the predictive validity of frailty and its domains (physical, psychological, and social), as measured by the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI), for the adverse outcomes disability, health care utilization, and quality of life. DESIGN AND METHODS: The predictive validity of the TFI was tested in a representative sample of 484 community-dwelling persons aged 75 years and older in 2008 (response rate 42%). A subset of all respondents participated 1 year later (N = 336, 69%) and again 2 years later (N = 266, 55%). We used the TFI, the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale assessing disability, seven indicators of health care utilization, and a brief version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life questionnaire (WHOQOL-BREF). The WHOQOL-BREF was assessed in 2008 and 2010; all others were assessed in 2008, 2009, and 2010. RESULTS: The predictive validity of the TFI assessed in 2008 for disability, health care utilization, and quality of life was corroborated by (a) medium to very large associations of frailty with adverse outcomes 1 or 2 years later; (b) mostly good to excellent area under the curve of total frailty; and (c) an increase in predictive accuracy of most adverse outcomes, even after controlling for that same adverse outcome in 2008, and life-course determinants and multimorbidity. Physical frailty was mostly responsible for the predictive validity of the TFI. IMPLICATIONS: This study showed that the TFI is a valid instrument to predict disability, many indicators of health care utilization, and quality of life of older people, 1 and 2 years later.
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“The Groningen Frailty Indicator (102) and the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (103) are simple and similar (104) questionnaire based approaches to detecting people with frailty.”
From Frailty in elderly people (2013) · cites this paper as [104]
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
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975) · Journal of Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6 · Cited by 88,282
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/bf03193146 · Cited by 65,971
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
Cohen, J. (1990) · Computers Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,417
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
The Timed “Up & Go”: A Test of Basic Functional Mobility for Frail Elderly Persons
Podsiadlo, D., & Richardson, S. (1991) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.1991.tb01616.x · Cited by 14,418
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
Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF Quality of Life Assessment
THE WHOQOL GROUP (1998) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291798006667 · Cited by 7,933
Skevington, S. M., Lotfy, M., & O'Connell, K. A. (2004) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1023/b:qure.0000018486.91360.00 · Cited by 4,686
Fried, L. P., Ferrucci, L., Darer, J., Williamson, J. D., & Anderson, G. (2004) · The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences · doi:10.1093/gerona/59.3.m255 · Cited by 4,032
Validity and reliability of the Edmonton Frail Scale
Rolfson, D. B., Majumdar, S. R., Tsuyuki, R. T., Tahir, A., & Rockwood, K. (2006) · Age and Ageing · doi:10.1093/ageing/afl041 · Cited by 1,643 · cited 2×
“Several other multi-dimensional instruments are currently available for measuring frailty in older persons, such as the Edmonton Frail Scale (Rolfson, Majumdar, Tsuyuki, Tahir, & Rockwood, 2006), the Frailty Index (Jones et al., 2004), and the Groningen Frailty Indicator (Schuurmans, Steverink,…”
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- 2010, 7, 137
- Hogan, 2003, Aging clinical and experimental research, 15, 1
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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
Frailty: implications for clinical practice and public health
Hoogendijk, E. O., Afilalo, J., Ensrud, K. E., Kowal, P. R., Onder, G., & Fried, L. P. (2019) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(19)31786-6 · Cited by 3,472
Cognitive frailty: Rational and definition from an (I.A.N.A./I.A.G.G.) International Consensus Group
Kelaiditi, E., Cesari, M., Canevelli, M., van Kan, G. A., Ousset, P., Guyonnet, S., Ritz, P., Duveau, F., Soto, M., Provencher, V., et al. (2013) · The journal of nutrition health & aging · doi:10.1007/s12603-013-0367-2 · Cited by 1,156
Frailty and the Prediction of Negative Health Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis
Vermeiren, S., Vella-Azzopardi, R., Beckwée, D., Habbig, A.-K., Scafoglieri, A., Jansen, B., Bautmans, I., Bautmans, I., Verté, D., Beyer, I., et al. (2016) · Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2016.09.010 · Cited by 1,068
Social frailty in older adults: a scoping review
Bunt, S., Steverink, N., Olthof, J., van der Schans, C. P., & Hobbelen, H. J. S. M. (2017) · European Journal of Ageing · doi:10.1007/s10433-017-0414-7 · Cited by 526
Metadata
- Authors
- Gobbens, R. J. J., van Assen, M. A. L. M., Luijkx, K. G., & Schols, J. M. G. A.
- Affiliations
- Tilburg University (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Gobbens, R. J. J.
- Venue
- The Gerontologist
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2012-01-04
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 619-631
- ISSN
- 0016-9013 (ISSN-L)
- 1758-5341
- OpenAlex
- W2158875429
- Cited by
- 289
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 9.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- The Gerontologist (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Research portal (Tilburg University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
- Keywords
- Tilburg Frailty Indicator, frailty, predictive validity, disability, health care utilization, quality of life, older adults, physical frailty, psychological frailty, social frailty, community-dwelling older adults, multimorbidity
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Disability Evaluation, Female, Persons with Disabilities, Health Services, Humans, Male, Netherlands, Predictive Value of Tests, Primary Health Care, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Regression Analysis, Risk, Socioeconomic Factors, World Health Organization, Reproducibility of Results, Geriatric Assessment, Frail Elderly, Vulnerable Populations
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
