Abstract
We read with great interest the recent article by Peters et al. 1 Peters L.L. Boter H. Buskens E. Slaets J.P.J. Measurement properties of the Groningen frailty indicator in home-dwelling and institutionalized elderly people. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2012; 13: 546-551 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (238) Google Scholar Investigating the measurement properties of a widely used frailty instrument such as the Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI) is of major importance for research and clinical practice. We agree with their statement in the introduction that a comprehensive psychometric evaluation of the GFI is lacking. However, we believe that in a comprehensive psychometric evaluation more measurement properties need to be assessed than Peters et al 1 Peters L.L. Boter H. Buskens E. Slaets J.P.J. Measurement properties of the Groningen frailty indicator in home-dwelling and institutionalized elderly people. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2012; 13: 546-551 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (238) Google Scholar did in their study. They focused on reliability, validity, and feasibility, the same as previous studies on the GFI did. 2 Schuurmans H. Steverink N. Lindenberg S. et al. Old or frail: What tells us more?. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2004; 59: 962-965 Crossref Google Scholar , 3 Metzelthin S.F. Daniels R. van Rossum E. et al. The psychometric properties of three self-report screening instruments for identifying frail older people in the community. BMC Public Health. 2010; 10: 176-184 Crossref PubMed Scopus (118) Google Scholar In this context, there are three issues we would like to address.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
