Comparison of Electronic Health Data-Based Frailty Assessment Tools for Prediction of Adverse Outcomes of Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease.

IF 1.9
Ying Deng, Jianhao Kang, Xinghua Guo, Shaomin Li, Hualiang Liang, Leile Tang, Xun Liu
{"title":"Comparison of Electronic Health Data-Based Frailty Assessment Tools for Prediction of Adverse Outcomes of Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease.","authors":"Ying Deng, Jianhao Kang, Xinghua Guo, Shaomin Li, Hualiang Liang, Leile Tang, Xun Liu","doi":"10.1111/nep.70232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare four electronic health record (EHR)-based frailty tools-the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS), Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Groups Frailty Indicator (CFI), Electronic Frailty Index (eFI) and a Laboratory-based Frailty Index (FI-Lab)-in predicting progression and all-cause mortality in hospitalised patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study evaluated the indices in two cohorts: a single-centre cohort (n = 5715) for CKD progression and the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC) database (n = 2674) for mortality. We used Cox proportional hazards regression for association analyses. The incremental predictive value of adding frailty indices to established risk models was quantified using the area under the curve (AUC), net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Correlations between the frailty indices were weak to moderate (Spearman's ρ = 0.205-0.451). In adjusted analyses, CFI, eFI and FI-Lab were associated with a higher risk of CKD progression, whereas HFRS was not. In the MIMIC cohort, all four indices were significantly associated with all-cause mortality. Notably, the CFI association was non-significant in patients < 65 years for both CKD progression and 28-day mortality. For predictive enhancement, adding FI-Lab and eFI to established CKD risk models significantly improved progression prediction (ΔAUC p < 0.05), yielding substantial reclassification (NRI: 0.376-0.498) and discrimination (IDI: 0.032-0.048). For mortality prediction, all indices improved baseline severity scores, with FI-Lab providing the greatest incremental value.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Among the evaluated EHR-based frailty indices, FI-Lab offers the most robust utility for risk stratification in hospitalised patients with CKD, followed closely by eFI.</p>","PeriodicalId":520716,"journal":{"name":"Nephrology (Carlton, Vic.)","volume":"31 7","pages":"e70232"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13371995/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nephrology (Carlton, Vic.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nep.70232","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To compare four electronic health record (EHR)-based frailty tools-the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS), Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Groups Frailty Indicator (CFI), Electronic Frailty Index (eFI) and a Laboratory-based Frailty Index (FI-Lab)-in predicting progression and all-cause mortality in hospitalised patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).

Methods: This retrospective study evaluated the indices in two cohorts: a single-centre cohort (n = 5715) for CKD progression and the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC) database (n = 2674) for mortality. We used Cox proportional hazards regression for association analyses. The incremental predictive value of adding frailty indices to established risk models was quantified using the area under the curve (AUC), net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI).

Results: Correlations between the frailty indices were weak to moderate (Spearman's ρ = 0.205-0.451). In adjusted analyses, CFI, eFI and FI-Lab were associated with a higher risk of CKD progression, whereas HFRS was not. In the MIMIC cohort, all four indices were significantly associated with all-cause mortality. Notably, the CFI association was non-significant in patients < 65 years for both CKD progression and 28-day mortality. For predictive enhancement, adding FI-Lab and eFI to established CKD risk models significantly improved progression prediction (ΔAUC p < 0.05), yielding substantial reclassification (NRI: 0.376-0.498) and discrimination (IDI: 0.032-0.048). For mortality prediction, all indices improved baseline severity scores, with FI-Lab providing the greatest incremental value.

Conclusion: Among the evaluated EHR-based frailty indices, FI-Lab offers the most robust utility for risk stratification in hospitalised patients with CKD, followed closely by eFI.

基于电子健康数据的衰弱评估工具预测慢性肾脏疾病患者不良结局的比较
目的:比较四种基于电子健康记录(EHR)的衰弱工具——医院衰弱风险评分(HFRS)、约翰霍普金斯调整临床组衰弱指标(CFI)、电子衰弱指数(eFI)和基于实验室的衰弱指数(FI-Lab)——在预测慢性肾病(CKD)住院患者的进展和全因死亡率方面的作用。方法:本回顾性研究评估了两个队列的指标:CKD进展的单中心队列(n = 5715)和重症监护医学信息市场(MIMIC)数据库(n = 2674)的死亡率。我们使用Cox比例风险回归进行关联分析。采用曲线下面积(AUC)、净重分类改善(NRI)和综合判别改善(IDI)对已建立的风险模型添加脆弱性指标的增量预测值进行量化。结果:各指标间的相关性为弱至中度(Spearman ρ = 0.205 ~ 0.451)。在调整分析中,CFI、eFI和FI-Lab与CKD进展的高风险相关,而HFRS则无关。在MIMIC队列中,所有四个指标都与全因死亡率显著相关。结论:在评估的基于ehr的衰弱指数中,FI-Lab在CKD住院患者的风险分层中提供了最强大的效用,其次是eFI。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书