Screening Tools for Identifying Older Adults With Cancer Who May Benefit From a Geriatric Assessment

医学 奇纳 梅德林 老年肿瘤学 系统回顾 家庭医学 老年学 癌症 老年病科 癌症筛查 心理干预 内科学 护理部 政治学 精神科 法学
作者
Maja Garcia,Meera Agar,Wee Kheng Soo,Timothy To,Jane Phillips
出处
期刊:JAMA Oncology [American Medical Association]
卷期号:7 (4): 616-616 被引量:113
标识
DOI:10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.6736
摘要

Importance

Older adults with cancer are at risk of overtreatment or undertreatment when decision-making is based solely on chronological age. Although a geriatric assessment is recommended to inform care, the time and expertise required limit its feasibility for all patients. Screening tools offer the potential to identify those who will benefit most from a geriatric assessment. Consensus about the optimal tool to use is lacking.

Objective

To appraise the evidence on screening tools used for older adults with cancer and identify an optimal screening tool for older adults with cancer who may benefit from geriatric assessment.

Evidence Review

Systematic review of 4 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL [Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature], and PubMed) with narrative synthesis from January 1, 2000, to March 14, 2019. Studies reporting on the diagnostic accuracy and use of validated screening tools to identify older adults with cancer who need a geriatric assessment were eligible for inclusion. Data were analyzed from March 14, 2019, to March 23, 2020.

Findings

Seventeen unique studies were included, reporting on the use of 12 screening tools. Most studies were prospective cohort studies (n = 11) with only 1 randomized clinical trial. Not all studies reported time taken to administer the screening tools. The Geriatric-8 (G8) (n = 12) and the Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13) (n = 9) were the most frequently evaluated screening tools. The G8 scored better in sensitivity and the VES-13 in specificity. Other screening tools evaluated include the Groningen Frailty Index, abbreviated comprehensive geriatric assessment, and Physical Performance Test in 2 studies each. All other screening tools were evaluated in 1 study each.

Conclusions and Relevance

To date, the G8 and VES-13 have the most evidence to recommend their use to inform the need for geriatric assessment. When choosing a screening tool, clinicians will need to weigh the tradeoffs between sensitivity and specificity. Future research needs to further validate or improve current screening tools and explore other factors that can influence their use, such as ease of use and resourcing.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
PDF的下载单位、IP信息已删除 (2025-6-4)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
1秒前
wongtinlun发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
2秒前
过过过完成签到 ,获得积分10
2秒前
仁爱春天完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
情怀应助典雅的俊驰采纳,获得10
4秒前
6秒前
zhaozi发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
CAOHOU应助灰底爆米花采纳,获得10
6秒前
6秒前
善学以致用应助jj采纳,获得10
7秒前
科研人发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
DDDuan发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
9秒前
11秒前
11秒前
柳叶小弯刀完成签到,获得积分10
11秒前
冯涛完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
12秒前
14秒前
脑洞疼应助抹茶芝士酸奶采纳,获得20
14秒前
科研通AI5应助Alice采纳,获得10
15秒前
15秒前
sherryyijia发布了新的文献求助10
15秒前
嘻嘻哈哈发布了新的文献求助10
16秒前
ding应助巧巧艾采纳,获得10
18秒前
小冉发布了新的文献求助10
18秒前
拼搏的潘子完成签到,获得积分10
19秒前
张先生完成签到 ,获得积分10
19秒前
小马甲应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
20秒前
SciGPT应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
20秒前
NexusExplorer应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
20秒前
20秒前
20秒前
21秒前
科研通AI5应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
21秒前
21秒前
21秒前
orixero应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
21秒前
21秒前
高分求助中
【重要!!请各位用户详细阅读此贴】科研通的精品贴汇总(请勿应助) 10000
Plutonium Handbook 1000
Three plays : drama 1000
International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Madrid Code) (Regnum Vegetabile) 1000
Semantics for Latin: An Introduction 999
Psychology Applied to Teaching 14th Edition 600
Robot-supported joining of reinforcement textiles with one-sided sewing heads 600
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 工程类 有机化学 生物化学 物理 内科学 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 复合材料 遗传学 基因 物理化学 催化作用 冶金 细胞生物学 免疫学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 4097829
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 3635550
关于积分的说明 11523637
捐赠科研通 3345678
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1838900
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 906403
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 823616