Cited by 96Frailty in Older AdultsChronic Disease Management StrategiesAging, Health, and Disability

Comparison of alternate scoring of variables on the performance of the frailty index

Open access
Peña, Fernando G, Theou, Olga, Wallace, Lindsay, Brothers, Thomas D, Gill, Thomas M, Gahbauer, Evelyne A, Kirkland, Susan, Mitnitski, Arnold +1 more·2014·BMC Geriatrics

Abstract

Background: The frailty index (FI) is used to measure the health status of ageing individuals. An FI is constructed as the proportion of deficits present in an individual out of the total number of age-related health variables considered. The purpose of this study was to systematically assess whether dichotomizing deficits included in an FI affects the information value of the whole index. Methods: Secondary analysis of three population-based longitudinal studies of community dwelling individuals: Nova Scotia Health Survey (NSHS, n = 3227 aged 18+), Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE, n = 37546 aged 50+), and Yale Precipitating Events Project (Yale-PEP, n = 754 aged 70+). For each dataset, we constructed two FIs from baseline data using the deficit accumulation approach. In each dataset, both FIs included the same variables (23 in NSHS, 70 in SHARE, 33 in Yale-PEP). One FI was constructed with only dichotomous values (marking presence or absence of a deficit); in the other FI, as many variables as possible were coded as ordinal (graded severity of a deficit). Participants in each study were followed for different durations (NSHS: 10 years, SHARE: 5 years, Yale PEP: 12 years). Results: Within each dataset, the difference in mean scores between the ordinal and dichotomous-only FIs ranged from 0 to 1.5 deficits. Their ability to predict mortality was identical; their absolute difference in area under the ROC curve ranged from 0.00 to 0.02, and their absolute difference between Cox Hazard Ratios ranged from 0.001 to 0.009. Conclusions: Analyses from three diverse datasets suggest that variables included in an FI can be coded either as dichotomous or ordinal, with negligible impact on the performance of the index in predicting mortality.

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 · 10.1186/1471-2318-14-25

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 21 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Peña, F. G., Theou, O., Wallace, L., Brothers, T. D., Gill, T. M., Gahbauer, E. A., Kirkland, S., Mitnitski, A., & Rockwood, K.
Affiliations
  • Dalhousie University (CA)
  • Yale University (US)
Corresponding author
Rockwood, Kenneth
Venue
BMC Geriatrics
Published
2014-02-24
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
25-25
ISSN
1471-2318 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2026733709
Cited by
96
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 4
FWCI
4.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Geriatrics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Dalhousie Medical Research Foundation
  • European Commission (261982, IAG BSR06-11, QLK6‐CT‐2001‐ 00360, RII-CT- 2006-062193, P01_AG08291, SHARE-I3: RII-CT-2006-062193, SHARE M4, SHARE-I3, U01 AG09740-13S2, CT-2001-00360, P30 AG12815, CIT5-CT-2005- 028857, R21_AG025169, P01 AG005842, OGHA 04-064, CIT4-CT-2006-028812, Y1-AG-4553-01, 227822, COMPARE: CIT5‐CT‐2005‐028857, SHARELIFE: CIT4-CT-2006–028812)
  • Dalhousie University
  • National Institutes of Health (2p30ag012815-16)
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  • National Institute on Aging (U01 AG09740-13S2, P01 AG005842, P01 AG08291, P30 AG12815, R21 AG025169, Y1-AG-4553-01, IAG BSR06-11 and OGHA 04-064, OGHA 04- 064, CIT5-CT-2005-028857, R37AG017560, IAG BSR06-11 and OGHA 04-064, U01 AG09740‐13S2, P30AG12815, P01AG08291, AG09740, 261982, QLK6-CT-2001-00360, U01 AG 09740, K07AG043587, R37AG17560, BSR06-11, CIT4-CT-2006-028812, 227822, IAG BSR06- 11, R21AG025169, AG005842, RII-CT-2006-062193, P01AG005842, U01AG009740, P30AG021342, Y1-AG-4553–01)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
Keywords
frailty index, deficit accumulation, variable coding, mortality prediction, aging, health status measurement, community-dwelling older adults
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Animals, Cats, Health Surveys, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Middle Aged, Nova Scotia, Population Surveillance, Geriatric Assessment, Frail Elderly, Young Adult

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