IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0343249.html

Developing and validating a frailty score based on patient-reported outcome 3 months after stroke: A Riksstroke-based study

Author

Listed:
  • Joakim Wallmark
  • Marie Wiberg
  • Marie Eriksson

Abstract

Background: Frailty is common after stroke and linked to poor outcomes, but many measures are clinician-rated, time-consuming, and not suited to patient-reported data. To address these issues, we developed and validated a frailty score from the Swedish Stroke Register (Riksstroke) three-month follow-up questionnaire.Methods: We analyzed responses from 19,470 stroke survivors to nine patient-reported items covering function, mood, fatigue, pain and general health, in the 2021–2022 Riksstroke questionnaire. Dimensionality was assessed with Mokken Scale Analysis and exploratory factor analysis. Item response theory (IRT) was used for score computation. Competing graded response IRT models (unidimensional, correlated-factor, bifactor) were compared, and measurement fairness was examined using differential item functioning (DIF) across age, sex, and education. Prognostic validity was tested with Kaplan–Meier curves and Cox regression for all-cause mortality.Results: From the Mokken Scale Analysis, all items met scalability criteria. Factor analysis suggested two correlated interpretable facets (Physical Functioning; Well-being/Mental Health). A bifactor IRT model provided the best fit to the data, comprising a general frailty dimension while addressing the strong correlation between the facets. DIF was minimal for sex and education, with modest age-related effects. Higher frailty scores were associated with increased mortality in adjusted Cox models and Kaplan–Meier curves. Tools for computing frailty scores are available at https://github.com/joakimwallmark/frailty-irt-scores.Conclusions: A robust, fair, and prognostically meaningful frailty score can be derived from patient-reported items in Riksstroke. More broadly, the study demonstrates how routinely collected patient-reported outcome measures can be leveraged to build scalable frailty scores, offering efficient cost-effective tools for monitoring outcome and guiding quality improvement in stroke care.

Suggested Citation

  • Joakim Wallmark & Marie Wiberg & Marie Eriksson, 2026. "Developing and validating a frailty score based on patient-reported outcome 3 months after stroke: A Riksstroke-based study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(2), pages 1-15, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0343249
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0343249
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0343249
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0343249&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0343249?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0343249. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.