Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Oct 23, 2025
Open Peer Review Period: Sep 22, 2025 - Nov 17, 2025
Date Accepted: Jan 5, 2026
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Characterization of Models for Identifying Physical and Cognitive Frailty in Older Adults With Diabetes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Wang X, Meng S, Xiao X, Lu L, Chen H, Li Y, Zhang R, Jiang Q, Liu S, Gao R

Characterization of Models for Identifying Physical and Cognitive Frailty in Older Adults With Diabetes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

J Med Internet Res 2026;28:e84617

DOI: 10.2196/84617

PMID: 41610414

PMCID: 12854664

Characterization of Models for Identifying Frailty and Cognitive Frailty in Older Adults with Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

  • Xia Wang; 
  • Shujie Meng; 
  • Xiang Xiao; 
  • Liu Lu; 
  • Hongyan Chen; 
  • Yong Li; 
  • Rong Zhang; 
  • Qiwu Jiang; 
  • Shan Liu; 
  • Ru Gao

ABSTRACT

Background:

A growing number of risk prediction models have been developed to estimate the risk of frailty in individuals with diabetes. However, the methodological quality and clinical utility of these models remain uncertain, limiting their application in both clinical settings and future research.

Objective:

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate and characterize existing prediction models for frailty in patients with diabetes.

Methods:

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and VIP was conducted from their inception until March 2025. Relevant studies were identified, and extracted data included study design, data sources, outcome definitions, sample sizes, predictors, model development methods, and performance metrics. The Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) was used to assess the risk of bias and applicability of each included study.

Results:

A total of 3,080 records were identified through database searches. After screening, 25 studies (reporting 29 prediction models) were included. The prevalence of frailty in these patients with diabetes ranged from 10.1% to 62.1%. The most frequent predictors were depression, age, and regular exercise status. Among the 29 models, the reported the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values ranged from 0.630 to 0.983. All studies were found to have a high risk of bias, mainly owing to limitations in the analytical methods. The meta-analysis yielded a pooled AUC of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.83–0.87).

Conclusions:

Although the included studies demonstrated reasonable discriminative ability in predicting frailty among patients with diabetes, the overall methodological quality was suboptimal, with a high risk of bias identified in all studies. To enhance the reliability and generalisability of future prediction tools, further research should prioritise the development of models using large-scale, multicentre prospective cohorts, with rigorous external validation across diverse populations. Clinical Trial: Not Applicable


 Citation

Please cite as:

Wang X, Meng S, Xiao X, Lu L, Chen H, Li Y, Zhang R, Jiang Q, Liu S, Gao R

Characterization of Models for Identifying Physical and Cognitive Frailty in Older Adults With Diabetes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

J Med Internet Res 2026;28:e84617

DOI: 10.2196/84617

PMID: 41610414

PMCID: 12854664

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.