Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(31)
Comparison of frailty instruments in low-middle income countries, where the prevalence of frailty may be higher, is scarce.
We aimed to compare the performance of 3 frailty instruments for predicting adverse outcomes after 1 year of follow-up in older adults with an acute event or a chronic decompensated disease.
Most frailty instruments are designed exclusively to predict frailty.
The two frailty instruments turned out to be correlated with each other (r=0.483, P<0.001).
Of the 27 frailty instruments, five included only objective components [ 41- 45].
In fact, we included similar frailty instruments than those comprised in the recent reviews [ 83, 84].
Similar(28)
PHNs perception of frailty, without using a standardized frailty instrument, described 335/803 (42 %) patients as frail.
Ideally, the better frailty instrument should have a sensibility and a specificity corresponding to 100%.
In addition, we used wave 4 data 55 56 (2011–2012) to validate the frailty instrument against incident disability.
The PHNs own opinion of frailty, without use of a standardized frailty instrument, described 335 (42%) subjects as frail.
The SHARE Frailty Instrument has sufficient construct and predictive validity, and is readily and freely accessible via web calculators.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com