↓ Skip to main content

Prevalence of frailty in end-stage renal disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Geriatric Nephrology and Urology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 Mendeley
Title
Prevalence of frailty in end-stage renal disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Geriatric Nephrology and Urology, February 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11255-017-1547-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gotaro Kojima

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on prevalence of frailty among patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). ESRD is associated with malnutrition, chronic inflammation, acidemia, impaired hormonal changes, and low physical activity, all of which can directly and indirectly contribute to the development of frailty. Coexistence of ESRD and frailty has been shown to increase risks of adverse health outcomes. Given potential reversibility of frailty, it is important to examine frailty status in this high-risk population. Three databases (EMBASE, Medline, and CINAHL) were systematically searched for studies providing cross-sectional data of prevalence of frailty defined by cardiovascular health study (CHS) criteria among ESRD patients. Meta-analysis calculated pooled prevalence of frailty according to modifications of CHS criteria. Of 837 studies identified through the systematic review, seven studies were included. Three studies used both objectively measured and self-reported CHS criteria, and two studies each used only either criteria. Pooled prevalence of frailty was 36.8% (five studies: 95% CI = 29.9-44.1%, I (2) = 82.6%, p < 0.001) and 67.0% (five studies: 95% CI = 58.7-74.7%, I (2) = 96.5%, p < 0.001) according to the objectively measured and self-reported CHS criteria, respectively. More than one-third of ESRD patients were frail based on the objectively measured CHS criteria, and that prevalence of frailty almost doubled with the CHS criteria substituting self-reported physical function questionnaire score for objective measurements. Given substantial difference in prevalence of frailty depending on the modifications to CHS criteria, this information should be taken into account when evaluating frailty status among ESRD population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 10%
Student > Master 11 10%
Researcher 9 8%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 36 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 12%
Psychology 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 <1%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 37 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 March 2018.
All research outputs
#15,742,933
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Geriatric Nephrology and Urology
#750
of 1,493 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,499
of 324,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Geriatric Nephrology and Urology
#13
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,493 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,325 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.