ArticleEuropean journal of public health2026
Measuring bio-psycho-social frailty in older adults across multiple surveys and indicators: evidence from Italy for public health policy.
Article in European journal of public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Detecting and measuring frailty is essential to inform health policy. Numerous frailty tools exist, but their application to population data remains limited. This study focuses on Italy and adopts a policymaker's perspective to identify practical, nationally applicable tools for bio-psycho-social frailty assessment using existing survey data. Three validated bio-psycho-social indicators-the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI), the Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI), and the Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS)-were operationalized across four population surveys (SHARE, EU-SILC, EHIS, and AVQ). The study proceeded in three steps: (i) reconstruction of each indicator within each dataset to assess items' replicability; (ii) validation of reproducible indicators by examining their psychometric properties; (iii) comparison of prevalence and predictive validity across indicators to illustrate their relative strengths and limitations. The GFI was the most replicable across surveys, while the EFS showed the strongest predictive ability. Among datasets, EHIS emerged as the most suitable platform, offering higher indicators' reproducibility and strong validity. Regional analyses revealed a clear North-South gradient, and regression models confirmed that frailty adds explanatory power for health outcomes beyond chronological age and other sociodemographic characteristics. The study demonstrates that bio-psycho-social frailty can be measured using existing national surveys, providing a low-cost and reproducible framework for national monitoring. By highlighting the added value of frailty over age in predicting health needs, it lays the groundwork for integrating frailty assessment into public health planning and supporting more equitable and effective policy responses to population ageing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.