MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174787666 · doi:10.1002/onco.13894

A 10-Item Frailty Index Based on a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (FI-CGA-10) in Older Adults with Cancer: Development and Construct Validation

2021· article· en· W3174787666 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tomohiro F. Nishijima, Mototsugu Shimokawa, Taito Esaki, Masaru Morita, Yasushi Toh, Hyman B. Muss

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Oncologist · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceFukuoka Foundation for Sound HealthResearch Promotion Foundation
KeywordsMedicineComorbidityGeriatric oncologyGerontologyMoodConstruct validityActivities of daily livingCognitionGeriatricsCancerInternal medicinePhysical therapyPsychometricsClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A frailty index (FI) based on domain-level deficits identified through a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) has been previously developed and validated in general geriatric patients. Our objectives were to construct an FI-CGA and to assess its construct validity in the geriatric oncology setting. METHODS: Five hundred forty consecutive Japanese patients with cancer who underwent a CGA on a geriatric oncology service were included (median age 80 years, range 66-96 years). We developed a 10-item frailty index based on deficits in 10 domains (FI-CGA-10): cognition, mood, communication, mobility, balance, nutrition, basic and instrumental activities of daily living, social support, and comorbidity. Deficits in each domain were scored as 0 (no problem), 0.5 (minor problem), and 1.0 (major problem). Scores were calculated by dividing the sum of the scores for each domain by 10 and then categorized as fit (<0.2), pre-frail (0.2-0.35), and frail (>0.35). Construct validity was tested by correlating the FI-CGA-10 with other established frailty measures. RESULTS: FI-CGA-10 was well approximated by the gamma distribution. Overall, 20% of patients were fit, 41% were pre-frail, and 39% were frail. FI-CGA-10 was correlated with Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA) Clinical Frailty Scale (r = 0.83), CSHA rules-based frailty definition (r = 0.67), and CSHA Function Score (r = 0.77). Increasing levels of frailty were significantly associated with functional and cognitive impairments, high comorbidity burden, poor self-rated health, and low estimated survival probabilities. CONCLUSION: The FI-CGA-10 is a user-friendly and construct-validated measure for quantifying frailty from a CGA. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This article describes the construction of a user-friendly 10-item frailty index based on a comprehensive geriatric assessment (FI-CGA-10) for older adults with cancer: cognition, mood, communication, mobility, balance, nutrition, basic and instrumental activities of daily living, social support, and comorbidity. The FI-CGA-10 simplifies the original FI-CGA used in the general geriatric setting while maintaining its content validity. The index's construct validity was demonstrated in a cohort of older adults with various cancer types. The advantage of the FI-CGA-10 is that a frailty score can be calculated more readily and interpreted in a more clinically sensible manner than the original FI-CGA.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe OncologistSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207