↓ Skip to main content

Incidence of frailty: a systematic review of scientific literature from a public health perspective.

Overview of attention for article published in Annali dell'Istituto Superiore di Sanità, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Incidence of frailty: a systematic review of scientific literature from a public health perspective.
Published in
Annali dell'Istituto Superiore di Sanità, January 2018
DOI 10.4415/ann_18_03_11
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lucia Galluzzo, Rónán O'Caoimh, Ángel Rodríguez-Laso, Nathalie Beltzer, Anette Hylen Ranhoff, Johan Van der Heyden, Maria Lamprini-Koula, Marius Ciutan, Luz López-Samaniego, Aaron Liew

Abstract

Because of the dynamic nature of frailty, prospective epidemiological data are essential to calibrate an adequate public health response. A systematic review of literature on frailty incidence was conducted within the European Joint Action ADVANTAGE. Of the 6 studies included, only 3 were specifically aimed at estimating frailty incidence, and only 2 provided disaggregated results by at least gender. The mean follow-up length (1-22.2 years; median 5.1), sample size (74-6306 individuals), and age of participants (≥ 30-65) varied greatly across studies. The adoption of incidence proportions rather than rates further limited comparability of results. After removing one outlier, incidence ranged from 5% (follow-up 22.2 years; age ≥ 30) to 13% (follow-up 1 year, age ≥ 55). Well-designed prospective studies of frailty are necessary. To facilitate comparison across studies and over time, incidence should be estimated in person-time rate. Analyses of factors associated with the development of frailty are needed to identify high-risk groups.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Student > Master 5 13%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Lecturer 2 5%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 12 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 14 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 February 2019.
All research outputs
#20,663,600
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Annali dell'Istituto Superiore di Sanità
#187
of 279 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#343,530
of 449,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annali dell'Istituto Superiore di Sanità
#8
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 279 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 449,583 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.