Association Between Frailty Status at Enrollment and Subsequent Mortality: Results of Proportional Hazards Model Analysis
| Modela . | HR (95% CI) of Frailty Phenotype Compared to Robust Phenotype . | . |
|---|---|---|
| . | Prefrail . | Frail . |
| Model 1 | 3.08 (1.30–7.28) | 10.87 (4.21–28.07) |
| P = .10 | P < .001 | |
| Model 2 | 2.68 (1.12–6.40) | 8.87 (3.38–23.28) |
| P = .026 | P < .001 | |
| Model 3 | 2.25 (.93–5.39) | 6.21 (2.31–16.73) |
| P = .071 | P < .001 | |
| Model 4 | 1.96 (.81–4.69) | 5.84 (2.21–15.46) |
| 0.133 | P < .001 | |
| Model 5 | 1.85 (.77–4.47) | 5.26 (1.97–14.05) |
| 0.172 | P = .001 | |
| Model 6 | 1.86 (.77–4.49) | 4.64 (1.72–12.50) |
| 0.165 | P = .002 |
| Modela . | HR (95% CI) of Frailty Phenotype Compared to Robust Phenotype . | . |
|---|---|---|
| . | Prefrail . | Frail . |
| Model 1 | 3.08 (1.30–7.28) | 10.87 (4.21–28.07) |
| P = .10 | P < .001 | |
| Model 2 | 2.68 (1.12–6.40) | 8.87 (3.38–23.28) |
| P = .026 | P < .001 | |
| Model 3 | 2.25 (.93–5.39) | 6.21 (2.31–16.73) |
| P = .071 | P < .001 | |
| Model 4 | 1.96 (.81–4.69) | 5.84 (2.21–15.46) |
| 0.133 | P < .001 | |
| Model 5 | 1.85 (.77–4.47) | 5.26 (1.97–14.05) |
| 0.172 | P = .001 | |
| Model 6 | 1.86 (.77–4.49) | 4.64 (1.72–12.50) |
| 0.165 | P = .002 |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio.
aModel 1: unadjusted; model 2: adjusted for age; model 3: further adjusted for human immunodeficiency virus; model 4: further adjusted for smoking status; model 5: further adjusted for alcohol status; model 6: further adjusted for log-transformed soluble CD163 plasma concentration.
Association Between Frailty Status at Enrollment and Subsequent Mortality: Results of Proportional Hazards Model Analysis
| Modela . | HR (95% CI) of Frailty Phenotype Compared to Robust Phenotype . | . |
|---|---|---|
| . | Prefrail . | Frail . |
| Model 1 | 3.08 (1.30–7.28) | 10.87 (4.21–28.07) |
| P = .10 | P < .001 | |
| Model 2 | 2.68 (1.12–6.40) | 8.87 (3.38–23.28) |
| P = .026 | P < .001 | |
| Model 3 | 2.25 (.93–5.39) | 6.21 (2.31–16.73) |
| P = .071 | P < .001 | |
| Model 4 | 1.96 (.81–4.69) | 5.84 (2.21–15.46) |
| 0.133 | P < .001 | |
| Model 5 | 1.85 (.77–4.47) | 5.26 (1.97–14.05) |
| 0.172 | P = .001 | |
| Model 6 | 1.86 (.77–4.49) | 4.64 (1.72–12.50) |
| 0.165 | P = .002 |
| Modela . | HR (95% CI) of Frailty Phenotype Compared to Robust Phenotype . | . |
|---|---|---|
| . | Prefrail . | Frail . |
| Model 1 | 3.08 (1.30–7.28) | 10.87 (4.21–28.07) |
| P = .10 | P < .001 | |
| Model 2 | 2.68 (1.12–6.40) | 8.87 (3.38–23.28) |
| P = .026 | P < .001 | |
| Model 3 | 2.25 (.93–5.39) | 6.21 (2.31–16.73) |
| P = .071 | P < .001 | |
| Model 4 | 1.96 (.81–4.69) | 5.84 (2.21–15.46) |
| 0.133 | P < .001 | |
| Model 5 | 1.85 (.77–4.47) | 5.26 (1.97–14.05) |
| 0.172 | P = .001 | |
| Model 6 | 1.86 (.77–4.49) | 4.64 (1.72–12.50) |
| 0.165 | P = .002 |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio.
aModel 1: unadjusted; model 2: adjusted for age; model 3: further adjusted for human immunodeficiency virus; model 4: further adjusted for smoking status; model 5: further adjusted for alcohol status; model 6: further adjusted for log-transformed soluble CD163 plasma concentration.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
