Skip to main content

Table 3 Competing Risk Model and Cox Proportional Hazards Model of Frailty and Incident Dementia by three Frailty definitions

From: The association between frailty and incidence of dementia in Beijing: findings from 10/66 dementia research group population-based cohort study

Model*Modified Fried Frailty PhenotypePhysical FrailtyMultidimensional Frailty
Competing risk modelHR (95% CI)Cox proportional hazards model HR (95% CI)Competing risk model HR (95% CI)Cox proportional hazards modelHR (95% CI)Competing risk modelHR (95% CI)Cox proportional hazards modelHR (95% CI)
Model 1
 No Frailty1.001.001.001.001.001.00
 Frailty1.71(1.09, 2.68)1.78(1.14, 2.79)1.78(1.25, 2.54)1.78(1.25, 2.53)2.14(1.53, 3.00)2.15(1.53, 3.02)
Model 2
 No Frailty1.001.001.001.001.001.00
 Frailty1.25(0.78, 2.01)1.33(0.84, 2.09)1.37(0.93, 2.01)1.32(0.92, 1.89)1.65(1.16, 2.34)1.66(1.17, 2.33)
Model 3
 No Frailty1.001.001.001.001.001.00
 Frailty1.14(0.69, 1.87)1.14(0.70, 1.84)1.16(0.78, 1.73)1.24(0.83, 1.85)1.47(1.01, 2.17)1.56(1.07, 2.26)
  1. HR Hazard Ratio; CI Confidence interval
  2. *Model 1: unadjusted; Model 2: adjusted age, gender, education level; Model 3: adjusted age, gender, education level, physical multimorbidity, walking distance, smoking status and alcohol use
\