The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Validation and Comparison of Two Frailty Indexes: The MOBILIZE Boston Study
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: To validate two established frailty indexes and compare their ability to predict adverse outcomes in a diverse, elderly, community‐dwelling sample of men and women. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: A diverse defined geographic area of Boston. PARTICIPANTS: Seven hundred sixty‐five community‐dwelling participants in the Maintenance of Balance, Independent Living, Intellect, and Zest in the Elderly Boston Study. MEASUREMENTS: Two published frailty indexes, recurrent falls, disability, overnight hospitalization, emergency department (ED) visits, chronic medical conditions, self‐reported health, physical function, cognitive ability (including executive function), and depression. One index was developed from the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures (SOF) and the other from the Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS). RESULTS: The SOF frailty index classified 77.1% as robust, 18.7% as prefrail, and 4.2% as frail. The CHS frailty index classified 51.2% as robust, 38.8% as prefrail, and 10.0% as frail. Both frailty indexes (SOF; CHS) were similar in their ability to predict key geriatric outcomes such as recurrent falls (hazard ratio (HR) frail =2.2, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.2–4.0; HR frail =1.9, 95% CI=1.2–3.1), overnight hospitalization (odds ratio (OR) frail =3.5, 95% CI=1.5–8.0; OR frail =4.4, 95% CI=2.4–8.2), ED visits (OR frail =3.5, 95% CI=1.4,8.8; OR frail =3.1, 95% CI=1.6–5.9), and disability (OR frail =5.4, 95% CI=2.3–12.3; OR frail =7.7, 95% CI=4.0–14.7), as well as chronic medical conditions, physical function, cognitive ability, and depression. CONCLUSION: Two established frailty indexes were validated using an independent elderly sample of diverse men and women; both indexes were good at distinguishing geriatric conditions and predicting recurrent falls, overnight hospitalization, and ED visits according to level of frailty. Although both indexes are good measures of frailty, the simpler SOF index may be easier and more practical in a 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
Kok, J. S., Berg, I. J., & Scherder, E. J. A. (2013) · Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra · doi:10.1159/000353441 · Cited by 20,589
Assessment of Older People: Self-Maintaining and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living
Lawton, M. P., & Brody, E. M. (1969) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/9.3_part_1.179 · Cited by 18,540
Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: a preliminary report
Yesavage, J. A., Brink, T. L., Rose, T. L., Lum, O., Huang, V., Adey, M., & Leirer, V. O. (1982) · Journal of Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1016/0022-3956(82)90033-4 · Cited by 15,025
Guralnik, J. M., Simonsick, E. M., Ferrucci, L., Glynn, R. J., Berkman, L. F., Blazer, D. G., Scherr, P. A., & Wallace, R. B. (1994) · Journal of Gerontology · doi:10.1093/geronj/49.2.m85 · Cited by 9,792
Jones, D., Song, X., Mitnitski, A., & Rockwood, K. (2005) · Aging Clinical and Experimental Research · doi:10.1007/bf03327413 · Cited by 267
Cited by
Prevalence of frailty in community-dwelling older persons: a systematic review
Collard, R. M., Boter, H., Schoevers, R. A., & Oude Voshaar, R. C. (2012) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2012.04054.x · Cited by 3,073
Outcome instruments to measure frailty: a systematic review
de Vries, N. M., Staal, J. B., van Ravensberg, C. D., Hobbelen, J. S. M., Olde Rikkert, M. G. M., & Nijhuis-van der Sanden, M. W. G. (2011) · Ageing Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.arr.2010.09.001 · Cited by 793
Frailty and Multimorbidity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Vetrano, D. L., Palmer, K., Marengoni, A., Marzetti, E., Lattanzio, F., Roller-Wirnsberger, R., Lopez Samaniego, L., Rodríguez-Mañas, L., Bernabei, R., Onder, G., et al. (2019) · The Journals of Gerontology: Series A · doi:10.1093/gerona/gly110 · Cited by 788
Association of frailty with survival: A systematic literature review
Shamliyan, T., Talley, K. M. C., Ramakrishnan, R., & Kane, R. L. (2013) · Ageing Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.arr.2012.03.001 · Cited by 666
Kojima, G. (2015) · Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2015.06.018 · Cited by 507
Metadata
- Authors
- Kiely, D. K., Cupples, L. A., & Lipsitz, L. A.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-08-28
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1532-1539
- ISSN
- 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-5415
- OpenAlex
- W2133812567
- Cited by
- 234
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 8.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Validation and Comparison of Two Frailty Indexes: The MOBILIZE Boston Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2009.02394.x
- The paper
- Kiely, D. K., Cupples, L. A., & Lipsitz, L. A. (2009). Validation and Comparison of Two Frailty Indexes: The MOBILIZE Boston Study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2009.02394.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.