Limits...
A clinical frailty index in aging mice: comparisons with frailty index data in humans.

Whitehead JC, Hildebrand BA, Sun M, Rockwood MR, Rose RA, Rockwood K, Howlett SE - J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. (2013)

Bottom Line: FIs calculated with the original performance-based eight-item FI increased from 0.06 ± 0.01 at 5 months to 0.36 ± 0.06 at 19 months and 0.38 ± 0.04 at 28 months (n = 14).By contrast, the increase was graded with a 31-item clinical FI (0.02 ± 0.005 at 5 months; 0.12 ± 0.008 at 19 months; 0.33 ± 0.02 at 28 months; n = 14).FI scores calculated from 70 self-report items from the first wave of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe were plotted as function of age (n = 30,025 people).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Pharmacology.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Comparison of the eight-item frailty and clinical frailty indices. (A) The scores for the eight-item frailty index were plotted as a function of the clinical frailty index scores. A regression line fitted through these data has an r2 value of .43 (p = .01). (B) The clinical frailty index was repeated on three separate trials in the oldest group. For 4/5 mice, the relationship showed little change with time (open symbols). However, one mouse that died 2 days after the final trial (filled symbols) showed a marked increase in the clinical frailty index.
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4022099&req=5

Figure 4: Comparison of the eight-item frailty and clinical frailty indices. (A) The scores for the eight-item frailty index were plotted as a function of the clinical frailty index scores. A regression line fitted through these data has an r2 value of .43 (p = .01). (B) The clinical frailty index was repeated on three separate trials in the oldest group. For 4/5 mice, the relationship showed little change with time (open symbols). However, one mouse that died 2 days after the final trial (filled symbols) showed a marked increase in the clinical frailty index.

Mentions: To compare the relationship between the performance-based eight-item frailty index and the clinical frailty index, we plotted the scores for the eight-item index against those for the clinical index as shown in Figure 4A. The relationship between these two indices was generally linear although the data were not a good fit to a straight line (r2 = .43; p = .01; Figure 4A).


A clinical frailty index in aging mice: comparisons with frailty index data in humans.

Whitehead JC, Hildebrand BA, Sun M, Rockwood MR, Rose RA, Rockwood K, Howlett SE - J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. (2013)

Comparison of the eight-item frailty and clinical frailty indices. (A) The scores for the eight-item frailty index were plotted as a function of the clinical frailty index scores. A regression line fitted through these data has an r2 value of .43 (p = .01). (B) The clinical frailty index was repeated on three separate trials in the oldest group. For 4/5 mice, the relationship showed little change with time (open symbols). However, one mouse that died 2 days after the final trial (filled symbols) showed a marked increase in the clinical frailty index.
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4022099&req=5

Figure 4: Comparison of the eight-item frailty and clinical frailty indices. (A) The scores for the eight-item frailty index were plotted as a function of the clinical frailty index scores. A regression line fitted through these data has an r2 value of .43 (p = .01). (B) The clinical frailty index was repeated on three separate trials in the oldest group. For 4/5 mice, the relationship showed little change with time (open symbols). However, one mouse that died 2 days after the final trial (filled symbols) showed a marked increase in the clinical frailty index.
Mentions: To compare the relationship between the performance-based eight-item frailty index and the clinical frailty index, we plotted the scores for the eight-item index against those for the clinical index as shown in Figure 4A. The relationship between these two indices was generally linear although the data were not a good fit to a straight line (r2 = .43; p = .01; Figure 4A).

Bottom Line: FIs calculated with the original performance-based eight-item FI increased from 0.06 ± 0.01 at 5 months to 0.36 ± 0.06 at 19 months and 0.38 ± 0.04 at 28 months (n = 14).By contrast, the increase was graded with a 31-item clinical FI (0.02 ± 0.005 at 5 months; 0.12 ± 0.008 at 19 months; 0.33 ± 0.02 at 28 months; n = 14).FI scores calculated from 70 self-report items from the first wave of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe were plotted as function of age (n = 30,025 people).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Pharmacology.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus