FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2160646254> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2160646254 endingPage "248" @default.
• W2160646254 startingPage "240" @default.
• W2160646254 abstract "<h3>Background:</h3> To compare the outcomes of Comprehensive Geriatric Assessments by family physicians and geriatricians. <h3>Methods:</h3> An explorative observational study was conducted in six family practices (12 ambulatory family practitioners) and 1 geriatric department (4 hospital-based geriatricians) from a university medical center in Nijmegen (the Netherlands). As participants, we included 587 patients aged 70 years and older and registered in the six family practices. The main outcome measures were the judgment on the following: 1) absence or presence of frailty and 2) the state (good-fair-poor) on 8 underlying domains (physical, medication, cognition, sensory, instrumental activities of daily living scale, mobility, mental, and social) according to family Physicians and geriatricians based on a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment. <h3>Results:</h3> Family physicians and geriatricians agreed on frailty absence/presence in 76% of cases. Geriatricians considered elderly more often frail than family physicians did (n = 294, 50% vs n = 213, 36%). Disagreement on frailty status was notably found in the patients who had less distinct, either poor or good, health states. Discordant frailty judgments, in which the geriatrician rated a person as frail and the family physicians did not, were related to geriatricians more often rating physical health as impaired. Further, geriatricians9 judgments of frailty were more strongly related to impaired scores on the domains cognition, sensory, mobility, and mental compared with family physicians judgments: odds ratios 79.3 versus 9.3, 7.6 versus 2.0, 25.0 versus 3.0, and 18.0 versus 2.2, respectively. Impaired physical health and problematic medication use had equally strong associations with frailty in geriatricians and family physicians: odds ratios of 11.5 versus 10.4 and 2.4 versus 2.5, respectively. <h3>Conclusions:</h3> Geriatricians more often judge patients as frail compared with family physicians and seem to evaluate the available information differently. With increasing collaboration between primary and secondary care, understanding these differences becomes increasingly relevant." @default.
• W2160646254 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2160646254 creator A5029136789 @default.
• W2160646254 creator A5050392051 @default.
• W2160646254 creator A5056253791 @default.
• W2160646254 creator A5062494839 @default.
• W2160646254 creator A5091144848 @default.
• W2160646254 date "2015-03-01" @default.
• W2160646254 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W2160646254 title "Diagnosis of Frailty after a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment: Differences between Family Physicians and Geriatricians" @default.
• W2160646254 cites W100167573 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W1847168837 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2031248277 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2048802521 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2064650364 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2065738589 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2067098675 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2071268663 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2075366935 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2078276829 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2096657471 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2102997056 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2104119749 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2112357630 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2112519660 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2122443513 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2122806030 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2123193855 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2129700906 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2132964875 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2135206083 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2146365178 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2148666698 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2164777277 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2166281097 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W2313406286 @default.
• W2160646254 cites W39805860 @default.
• W2160646254 doi "https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2015.02.130081" @default.
• W2160646254 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25748765" @default.
• W2160646254 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W2160646254 type Work @default.
• W2160646254 sameAs 2160646254 @default.
• W2160646254 citedByCount "18" @default.
• W2160646254 countsByYear W21606462542015 @default.
• W2160646254 countsByYear W21606462542016 @default.
• W2160646254 countsByYear W21606462542017 @default.
• W2160646254 countsByYear W21606462542018 @default.
• W2160646254 countsByYear W21606462542019 @default.
• W2160646254 countsByYear W21606462542020 @default.
• W2160646254 countsByYear W21606462542021 @default.
• W2160646254 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2160646254 hasAuthorship W2160646254A5029136789 @default.
• W2160646254 hasAuthorship W2160646254A5050392051 @default.
• W2160646254 hasAuthorship W2160646254A5056253791 @default.
• W2160646254 hasAuthorship W2160646254A5062494839 @default.
• W2160646254 hasAuthorship W2160646254A5091144848 @default.
• W2160646254 hasBestOaLocation W21606462541 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConcept C134362201 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConcept C143095724 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConcept C151956035 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConcept C169900460 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConcept C23131810 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConcept C35785553 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConcept C512399662 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConcept C54183767 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConcept C74909509 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConceptScore W2160646254C118552586 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConceptScore W2160646254C126322002 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConceptScore W2160646254C134362201 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConceptScore W2160646254C142724271 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConceptScore W2160646254C143095724 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConceptScore W2160646254C151956035 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConceptScore W2160646254C169900460 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConceptScore W2160646254C23131810 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConceptScore W2160646254C35785553 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConceptScore W2160646254C512399662 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConceptScore W2160646254C54183767 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConceptScore W2160646254C71924100 @default.
• W2160646254 hasConceptScore W2160646254C74909509 @default.
• W2160646254 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2160646254 hasLocation W21606462541 @default.
• W2160646254 hasLocation W21606462542 @default.
• W2160646254 hasLocation W21606462543 @default.
• W2160646254 hasLocation W21606462544 @default.
• W2160646254 hasOpenAccess W2160646254 @default.
• W2160646254 hasPrimaryLocation W21606462541 @default.
• W2160646254 hasRelatedWork W1604293003 @default.
• W2160646254 hasRelatedWork W1604849300 @default.
• W2160646254 hasRelatedWork W1979850356 @default.
• W2160646254 hasRelatedWork W1984720268 @default.
• W2160646254 hasRelatedWork W2103779230 @default.
• W2160646254 hasRelatedWork W2109147503 @default.
• W2160646254 hasRelatedWork W2322581019 @default.
• W2160646254 hasRelatedWork W2766061861 @default.

• next