| Title |
Designing Drug Trials for Frailty: ICFSR Task Force 2018
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Journal of Frailty & Aging, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.14283/jfa.2018.20 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marco Pahor, S.B. Kritchevsky, D.L. Waters, D.T. Villareal, J. Morley, J.M. Hare, B. Vellas, The ICFSR Task Force |
| Abstract |
To reduce disability and dependence in older adults, frailty may represent an appropriate target for intervention. While preventing frailty through lifestyle interventions may be the optimal public health approach for many population groups, pharmacological approaches will likely be needed for individuals who meet frailty criteria or who have comorbid conditions that contribute to and complicate the frailty syndrome, and for those who are not compliant with lifestyle interventions. Barriers to successful development of drug treatments for frailty include variability in how the frailty syndrome is defined, lack of agreement on the best diagnostic tools and outcome measures, and the paucity of sensitive, reliable, and validated biomarkers. The International Conference on Frailty and Sarcopenia Research Task Force met in Miami, Florida, on February 28, 2018, to consider the status of treatments under development for frailty and discuss potential strategies for advancing the field. They concluded that at the present time, there may be a more productive regulatory pathway for adjuvant treatments or trials targeting specific functional outcomes such as gait speed. They also expressed optimism that several studies currently underway may provide the insight needed to advance drug development for frailty. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 4 | 50% |
| Australia | 1 | 13% |
| Spain | 1 | 13% |
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 1 | 13% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 17 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 13% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 19 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 12 November 2022.
All research outputs
#7,963,683
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Frailty & Aging
#222
of 416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,083
of 339,673 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Frailty & Aging
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 416 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 339,673 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.