Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 517

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cognitive Impairment Improves the Predictive Validity of the Phenotype of Frailty for Adverse Health Outcomes: The Three‐City Study

Ávila‐Funes, José Alberto, Amieva, Hélène, Barberger‐Gateau, Pascale, Le Goff, Mélanie, Raoux, Nadine, Ritchie, Karen, Carrière, Isabelle, Tavernier, Béatrice, Tzourio, Christophe, Gutiérrez‐Robledo, Luis Miguel, Dartigues, Jean‐François·2009·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
DOI 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.02136.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether adding cognitive impairment to frailty improves its predictive validity for adverse health outcomes. DESIGN: Four‐year longitudinal study. SETTING: The French Three‐City Study. PARTICIPANTS: Six thousand thirty community‐dwelling persons aged 65 to 95. MEASUREMENTS: Frailty was defined as having at least three of the following criteria: weight loss, weakness, exhaustion, slowness, and low physical activity. Subjects meeting one or two criteria were prefrail and those meeting none as nonfrail. The lowest quartile in the Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Isaacs Set Test (IST) was used to identify subjects with cognitive impairment. The predictive validity of frailty for incident disability, hospitalization, dementia, and death was calculated first for frailty subgroups and then rerun after stratification according to the presence or absence of cognitive impairment. RESULTS: Four hundred twenty‐one individuals (7%) met frailty criteria. Cognitive impairment was present in 10%, 12%, and 22% of the nonfrail, prefrail, and frail subjects, respectively. Those classified as frail scored lower on the MMSE and IST than those classified as prefrail and nonfrail. After adjustment, frail persons with cognitive impairment were significantly more likely to develop disability in activities of daily living (ADLs) and instrumental ADLs over the following 4 years. The risk of incident mobility disability and hospitalization was marginally greater. Incident dementia was greater in the groups with cognitive impairment irrespective of their frailty status. Conversely, frailty was not a significant predictor of mortality. CONCLUSION: Cognitive impairment improves the predictive validity of the operational definition of frailty, because it increases the risk of adverse health outcomes in this particular subgroup of the elderly population.

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 · 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.02136.x

Cites

53 of 53 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 53 references

Cited by

See all 517

Metadata

Authors
Ávila‐Funes, J. A., Amieva, H., Barberger‐Gateau, P., Le Goff, M., Raoux, N., Ritchie, K., Carrière, I., Tavernier, B., Tzourio, C., Gutiérrez‐Robledo, L. M., & Dartigues, J.
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-03
Volume
57
Issue
3
Pages
453-461
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
DOI
10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.02136.x
OpenAlex
W1491512019
Cited by
517
References
53
FWCI
15.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Cognitive Impairment Improves the Predictive Validity of the Phenotype of Frailty for Adverse Health Outcomes: The Three‐City Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.02136.x
The paper
Ávila‐Funes, J. A., Amieva, H., Barberger‐Gateau, P., Le Goff, M., Raoux, N., Ritchie, K., Carrière, I., Tavernier, B., Tzourio, C., Gutiérrez‐Robledo, L. M., & Dartigues, J. (2009). Cognitive Impairment Improves the Predictive Validity of the Phenotype of Frailty for Adverse Health Outcomes: The Three‐City Study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.02136.x

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.