↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Exploring the efficiency of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator: a review

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
151 Mendeley
Title
Exploring the efficiency of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator: a review
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, October 2017
DOI 10.2147/cia.s130686
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robbert Gobbens, Jos Schols, Marcel van Assen

Abstract

Due to rapidly aging human populations, frailty has become an essential concept, as it identifies older people who have higher risk of adverse outcomes, such as disability, institutionalization, lower quality of life, and premature death. The Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) is a user-friendly questionnaire based on a multidimensional approach to frailty, assessing physical, psychologic, and social aspects of human functioning. This review aims to explore the efficiency of the TFI in assessing frailty as a means to carry out research into the antecedents and consequences of frailty, and its use both in daily practice and for future intervention studies. Using a multidimensional approach to frailty, in contexts where health care professionals or researchers may have no time to interview or examine the client, we recommend employing the TFI because there is robust evidence of its reliability and validity and it is easy and quick to administer. More studies are needed to establish whether the TFI is suitable for intervention studies not only in the community, but also for specific groups such as patients in the hospital or admitted to an emergency department. We conclude that it is important to not only determine the deficits that frail older people may have, but also to assess their balancing strengths and resources. In order to be able to meet the individual needs of frail older persons, traditional and often fragmented elderly care should be developed toward a more proactive elderly care, in which frail older persons and their informal network are in charge.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 151 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 13%
Researcher 20 13%
Student > Bachelor 17 11%
Professor 13 9%
Other 29 19%
Unknown 27 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 39 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 20%
Psychology 10 7%
Social Sciences 7 5%
Sports and Recreations 5 3%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 40 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 August 2019.
All research outputs
#8,977,955
of 15,640,467 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#757
of 1,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,889
of 322,963 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#31
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,640,467 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,503 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,963 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.