Mapping the Research Landscape of Frailty: A 15-Year (2010-2025) Bibliometric Study on PubMed database

Mapping the Research Landscape of Frailty: A 15-Year (2010-2025) Bibliometric Study on PubMed database | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Mapping the Research Landscape of Frailty: A 15-Year (2010-2025) Bibliometric Study on PubMed database Mukesh Kumar Barik, Manish Barik, Arjeet Samal, Sushree Nibedita Panda This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6726214/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background: Frailty, a multidimensional syndrome characterized by reduced physiological reserves and increased vulnerability to adverse outcomes, poses significant challenges to healthy aging worldwide. Despite growing interest in frailty research, a comprehensive bibliometric evaluation addressing its holistic dimensions remains lacking. This study aimed to map global research trends, key contributors, and emerging themes in frailty research from 2010 to 2025. Methods : A systematic bibliometric analysis was conducted using the PubMed database. The search strategy employed to capture relevant literature published between 2010 and January 2025. A total of 4,594 publications were identified, involving 24,087 authors across 1,109 journals. Parameters such as publication counts and top influential journals and corresponding author contributions were examined to provide a comprehensive overview of the field. Results: The analysis demonstrated a consistent increase in frailty-related publications over the 15-year period, with a remarkable surge between 2014 and 2016 marked by annual growth rates exceeding 44%. The number of publications peaked at 531 in 2021, followed by a brief decline in 2022 and 2023, and a subsequent resurgence in 2024 with 547 articles. Geographically, research output was dominated by developed regions, with Italy leading in overall productivity (3,612 publications), followed by significant contributions from the United States and Canada. The corresponding author analysis revealed that the United States contributed 11.8% of publications, Prominent institutions included the University of Toronto, and McMaster University Conclusion: This bibliometric study provides a detailed mapping of the global frailty research landscape, highlighting evolving trends, key contributors, and the shift towards multidimensional assessment frameworks. Geriatrics & Gerontology Physical Medicine & Rehab Frailty research trend bibliometric ageing Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Introduction Frailty, a multidimensional syndrome characterized by reduced physiological reserves and increased vulnerability to adverse health outcomes, has become a critical area of research in aging and geriatrics 1 , 2 . It has been shown that those who are frail are predisposed to various negative health outcomes, such as falls, fractures, hospitalisation, nursing home placement, disability, poor quality of life and dementia mostly among older adults 1 , 3 , 4 . As frailty is an age-related condition, it poses significant threats to global healthy ageing goals. The world is experiencing a major demographic transition, with the number of older people aged ≥ 60 projected to double by 2050 5–8 . With the global population aging rapidly, understanding frailty has become essential for healthcare systems worldwide to manage the burden of age-related diseases effectively. Over the past decade and a half, the scientific interest in frailty has grown exponentially. Researchers have investigated its underlying mechanisms, clinical manifestations, and interventions to mitigate its effects 9 , 10 . Concurrently, there has been a shift in focus from traditional healthcare paradigms to more holistic, patient-centered approaches that consider frailty's physical, cognitive, and psychosocial dimensions 9 – 12 . This broadening scope reflects the evolving understanding of frailty as not just a geriatric syndrome but also a public health challenge requiring multidisciplinary attention 13 . Bibliometric analysis is a powerful tool for assessing research trends, mapping the intellectual landscape, and identifying gaps in the existing literature 14 . By examining publication patterns, influential authors, institutions, and collaborative networks, bibliometric studies provide valuable insights into the trajectory of scientific research on a given topic 15 , 16 . While existing studies provide valuable insights into specific intersections—such as social frailty, frailty and heart failure, chronic kidney disease (CKD) with frailty, frailty and sarcopenia, and frailty with multimorbidity—there is no comprehensive evaluation of frailty as a holistic concept encompassing its diverse dimensions 17 – 21 . This study aims to fill this gap by analyzing publications indexed in PubMed from 2010 to 2025. Through this analysis, we seek to provide an overview of the global research landscape on frailty, highlight key contributors and themes, and identify emerging trends that could guide future investigations. Understanding these trends is crucial for fostering collaboration, optimizing resource allocation, and advancing knowledge in this emerging area of health and aging research. Methodology The PubMed database, which contains the world’s leading scholarly journals in medical sciences, was selected as the data source for this study. The literature related to frailty was searched from 2010 to 10 January 2025. The search terms and strategy were: (frail*) AND “Older adults”. To examine the effectiveness of the search results, one researcher assessed the relevance, to this study, of the top 100 most recently published articles. The results showed that 86% were related to frailty, indicating that the search terms and strategies were appropriate. Inclusion criteria were: (a) peer-reviewed original articles on frailty; (b) reviews related to frailty; (d) articles published from 2010 to 2025; and (e) articles published in English. Articles collected by hand, repeated publications, conference abstracts, and book chapters were excluded from the bibliometric analysis. The bibliometric data analysis was conducted using the Biblioshiny application, which provides a web interface for Bibliometrix 22 , an open-source tool used for quantitative research in bibliometrics, utilizing RStudio version 4.4.1 23 . In this study, the overall performance of the research components was analysed based on three criteria: sources, authors, and documents. The final analysis focused on the ten most relevant journals and authors, the author and the most productive countries and institutions. Results This study identified (Fig. 1 )4594 publications about frailty published in PubMed between 2010 and 2025. This investigation revealed that 24,087 authors contributed to producing 4594 manuscripts published in 1109 journals. The average co-author per documents is 7–8 authors. and international co-authorship percentages is 18.1% in Table 1 . Table 1 The summary of the findings Timespan 2010- January 2025 Sources (Journals, Books, etc) 1109 Documents 4594 Annual Growth Rate % -4.09 Document Average Age 5.86 Authors count Authors 24087 Authors of single-authored docs 156 Authors contribution Single-authored docs 177 Co-Authors per Doc 7.49 International co-authorships % 18.11 Publication trend between 2010–2025 in Frailty The analysis of frailty research publications over the past 15 years reveals significant trends and insights. The number of articles steadily increased from 2010, with 73 publications, to a peak of 531 in 2021. Notably, there was a sharp rise in publications from 2014 to 2016, with growth rates exceeding 44% annually, indicating a pivotal period for frailty research. However, the trend plateaued between 2019 and 2021, followed by a noticeable decline in 2022 and 2023, with only 355 and 322 articles published, respectively. Interestingly, 2024 saw a significant resurgence in publications, with 547 articles, the highest in the study period. The total number of publications during this period was 4,594, with an average of 287 articles annually (Fig. 2 ). Productivity of the frailty research country wise In Table 2 , Italy led global frailty research with 3,612 publications, followed by the United States (2,789) and Canada (2,336), highlighting significant contributions from North America and Europe. Japan (2,298) and China (2,177) demonstrated robust research activity from Asia but somewhat skewed in both the country than whole Asia. Spain (2,081), Australia (1,701), and European nations such as the Netherlands (1,670), France (1,640), and Germany (1,069) also made substantial contributions. From Fig. 3 , it is evident that frailty-related research has been predominantly conducted in North America, Europe, and Oceania, with limited contributions from the African continent, South America, and parts of Asia. Table 2 Country wise publication Country No. of articles Italy 3612 United State of America 2789 Canada 2336 Japan 2298 China 2177 Spain 2081 Australia 1701 Netherlands 1670 France 1640 Germany 1069 Contribution as corresponding author’s affiliate country In Table 3 The United States leads in corresponding author contributions with 607 articles (11.8%), reflecting its strong research infrastructure and global influence in frailty research. Italy follows with 364 articles (7.1%), while Canada (5.3%), China (4.8%), and Japan (4.7%) also demonstrate significant engagement. Australia and the Netherlands, both contributing 4.6%, along with Spain (3.8%), France (3.3%), and Germany (2.2%), highlight active participation from diverse regions. Table 3 Corresponding authors country Country Total no. articles % of articles United State of America 607 11.8 Italy 364 7.1 Canada 275 5.3 China 248 4.8 Japan 240 4.7 Australia 238 4.6 Netherlands 236 4.6 Spain 196 3.8 France 171 3.3 Germany 114 2.2 Top 10 most productive institutes in Frailty research The University of Toronto leads in frailty research contributions with 245 articles, closely followed by McMaster University (243) and the University of Alberta (206), showcasing Canada’s prominence in this field. Dalhousie University (177) and the University of Ottawa (167) further highlight Canada’s strong academic influence. Monash University (164) and the University of Oxford (160) represent significant contributions from Australia and the UK, respectively. Prominent U.S. institutions, such as the University of California (158) and Harvard Medical School (149), along with the University of Leeds (148) in Table 4 . Table 4 Top 10 Productive institutes in Frailty research Affiliation Articles University of Toronto 245 McMaster University 243 University of Alberta 206 Dalhousie University 177 University of Ottawa 167 Monash University 164 University of Oxford 160 University of California 158 Harvard Medical School 149 University of Leeds 148 Most relevant journals in the frailty research Analysis revealed in Table 5 , the top ten journals publishing frailty-related research. BMC Geriatrics led with 207 articles, followed by the Journal of The American Medical Directors Association (119), Age and Ageing (116), and the Journal of The American Geriatrics Society (101). Notable sources include Aging Clinical and Experimental Research (78), Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics (75), Journal of Geriatric Oncology (73), Clinical Interventions in Aging (64), Geriatrics & Gerontology International (64), and Nutrients (64). Table 5: Most relevant journals in the frailty research Sources Articles BMC Geriatrics 207 Journal of The American Medical Directors Association 119 Age and Ageing 116 Journal of The American Geriatrics Society 101 Aging Clinical and Experimental Research 78 Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics 75 Journal of Geriatric Oncology 73 Clinical Interventions in Aging 64 Geriatrics & Gerontology International 64 Nutrients 64 Discussion The current bibliometric analysis highlights an evolving and increasingly significant research landscape on frailty over the past 15 years. The steady increase in publications—from 73 in 2010 to a peak of 531 in 2021 and a resurgence to 547 in 2024 underscores the growing recognition of frailty as a complex, multidimensional syndrome that poses significant challenges to global healthy aging initiatives (24–26). This upward trajectory in publication output, particularly the rapid expansion observed between 2014 and 2016 with annual growth rates exceeding 44%, reflects not only the escalating prevalence of age-related health issues but also the broadening conceptual framework of frailty. Historically, frailty was narrowly conceptualized; however, contemporary research increasingly embraces its physical, cognitive, and psychosocial dimensions 27 – 29 . This multidimensional perspective has catalyzed interdisciplinary collaborations that enhance our understanding of frailty beyond traditional geriatric paradigms. Geographically, the analysis reveals that frailty research is predominantly concentrated in developed regions, with Italy, the United States, and Canada emerging as leading contributors. Italy’s high volume of publications (3,612) and the United States’ notable role as the corresponding author country (607 articles, 11.8%) indicate strong research infrastructures and a high level of engagement with frailty-related issues. These findings align with global demographic trends where aging populations are most prominent in developed countries, driving focused academic and clinical investigations into frailty 30 . In contrast, contributions from regions such as Africa, South America, and parts of Asia remain limited, suggesting potential disparities in research investment and healthcare resource allocation 31 . Institutional productivity further supports the notion that collaborative research networks are vital for advancing the field. Canadian institutions such as the University of Toronto, McMaster University, and the University of Alberta lead in research output, highlighting the country’s robust academic environment and commitment to addressing frailty. The involvement of globally recognized institutions such as Harvard Medical School, the University of Oxford, and the University of Leeds underscores the international collaboration imperative for tackling the multidimensional challenges of frailty 32 . Study implication: The bibliometric study on frailty research has significant implications for advancing both scientific inquiry and healthcare policy. Our findings highlight an exponential increase in frailty-related publications, concentrated primarily in developed regions such as North America and Europe. This indicates that while considerable progress has been made, there is a critical need to extend research efforts to underrepresented areas, including Africa, South America, and parts of Asia, to address global disparities in healthy aging. The identification of key authors, institutions, and collaborative networks provides a strategic roadmap for future research, emphasizing the importance of multidisciplinary and international partnerships. Moreover, the shift toward multidimensional assessments of frailty reinforces the need for integrated clinical approaches that enhance early detection and intervention. These insights can inform funding priorities and policy decisions aimed at optimizing resource allocation for comprehensive geriatric care Strength and limitation : Strengths of this study include its comprehensive bibliometric approach that captures global research trends on frailty over a 15-year period. By analyzing 4,594 publications from PubMed, the study maps the evolution of frailty research, identifies key authors, institutions, and collaborative networks, and highlights the shift toward multidimensional assessments of frailty. The use of robust analytical tools such as Bibliometrix and Biblioshiny enhances data visualization and provides quantitative insights to support strategic research planning. However, limitations include reliance on a single database (PubMed), which may have excluded relevant literature from other sources. The search strategy’s focus on English-language articles and exclusion of grey literature could lead to selection bias. Additionally, bibliometric indicators do not capture the qualitative impact or contextual nuances of research. Future studies should integrate multiple databases and qualitative assessments to further enhance the comprehensiveness and understanding of frailty research. Conclusion This bibliometric analysis reveals a robust growth in frailty research over the past 15 years, reflecting its emerging significance in global health. Dominated by contributions from developed nations, the study underscores the need for enhanced international collaboration and broader geographic representation. The findings highlight critical trends, influential research networks, and evolving conceptualizations, thereby providing a foundation for future studies aimed at developing integrated approaches to manage frailty and robustly promote healthy aging worldwide. Declarations Author contributions: Concept and design-; MB and SNP. Acquisition, statistical analysis, or interpretation of data: MB, MKB, AS and SNP. Drafting of the manuscript: MKB, AS and SNP. Monitored analysis and critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: MB, SNP, AS and MKB Administrative and technical support: MB. Supervision: MB and SNP. All the authors reviewed the manuscript. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript . Availability of Data and Material : All the data included in this analysis were publicly available database. Competing Interest: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Funding: None Ethical Approval: Not required Informed consent: Consent to participate is not needed, as the data used are secondary and freely accessible on the internet. All methods adhered to relevant guidelines and regulations. Consent for publication : Not required Competing interests: We declare that we have no competing interests. Acknowledgments : Not Applicable References Morley JE, Vellas B, Van Abellan G, Anker SD, Bauer JM, Bernabei R et al (2013) Frailty Consensus: A Call to Action. J Am Med Dir Assoc 14(6):392–397 Leng S, Chen X, Mao G (2014) Frailty syndrome: an overview. Clin Interv Aging. ;433 Kojima G, Iliffe S, Walters K (2018) Frailty index as a predictor of mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Age Ageing 47(2):193–200 Hoogendijk EO, Afilalo J, Ensrud KE, Kowal P, Onder G, Fried LP (2019) Frailty: implications for clinical practice and public health. Lancet 394(10206):1365–1375 World Health Organization Ageing and health [Internet]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health Padeiro M, Santana P, Grant M Global aging and health determinants in a changing world. In: Aging [Internet]. Elsevier; 2023 [cited 2025 Jan 10]. pp. 3–30. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/B9780128237618000215 Howlett SE, Rutenberg AD, Rockwood K (2021) The degree of frailty as a translational measure of health in aging. Nat Aging 1(8):651–665 Fulop T, Larbi A, Witkowski JM, McElhaney J, Loeb M, Mitnitski A et al (2010) Aging, frailty and age-related diseases. Biogerontology 11(5):547–563 Sugimoto T, Arai H, Sakurai T (2022) An update on cognitive frailty: Its definition, impact, associated factors and underlying mechanisms, and interventions. Geriatr Gerontol Int 22(2):99–109 Dent E, Hanlon P, Sim M, Jylhävä J, Liu Z, Vetrano DL et al (2023) Recent developments in frailty identification, management, risk factors and prevention: A narrative review of leading journals in geriatrics and gerontology. Ageing Res Rev 91:102082 Gabutti I, Mascia D, Cicchetti A (2017) Exploring patient-centered hospitals: a systematic review to understand change. BMC Health Serv Res 17(1):364 Bokhour BG, Fix GM, Mueller NM, Barker AM, Lavela SL, Hill JN et al (2018) How can healthcare organizations implement patient-centered care? Examining a large-scale cultural transformation. BMC Health Serv Res 18(1):168 Rockwood K, Howlett SE (2018) Fifteen years of progress in understanding frailty and health in aging. BMC Med 16(1):220 s12916-018-1223–3 Manoj Kumar L, George RJ (2023) A. Bibliometric Analysis for Medical Research. Indian J Psychol Med 45(3):277–282 Donthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D, Pandey N, Lim WM (2021) How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. J Bus Res 133:285–296 Öztürk O, Kocaman R, Kanbach DK (2024) How to design bibliometric research: an overview and a framework proposal. Rev Manag Sci 18(11):3333–3361 Yuan G, Yang Y, Lin Y, Lin J, Wu Y (2024) Current status and development trends in CKD with frailty research from 2000 to 2021: a bibliometric analysis. Ren Fail 46(1):2292142 Ye L, Liang R, Liu X, Li J, Yue J, Zhang X (2023) Frailty and sarcopenia: A bibliometric analysis of their association and potential targets for intervention. Ageing Res Rev 92:102111 Deng P, Liu C, Chen M, Si L (2023) Knowledge domain and emerging trends in multimorbidity and frailty research from 2003 to 2023: a scientometric study using citespace and VOSviewer. Health Econ Rev 13(1):46 Zhang N, Qu X, Kang L, Liu X, Zhu W Mapping Knowledge Landscapes and Emerging Trends of the Links Between Frailty and Heart Failure: A Bibliometric Analysis From 2000 to 2023. Cureus [Internet]. 2024 May 17 [cited 2025 Jan 10]; Available from: https://www.cureus.com/articles/254497-mapping-knowledge-landscapes-and-emerging-trends-of-the-links-between-frailty-and-heart-failure-a-bibliometric-analysis-from-2000-to-2023 Wang H, Chen X, Zheng M, Wu Y, Liu L (2024) Research status and hotspots of social frailty in older adults: a bibliometric analysis from 2003 to 2022. Front Aging Neurosci 16:1409155 Aria M, Cuccurullo C (2017) bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J Informetr 11(4):959–975 [Internet]. RStudio, PBC, RStudio Team, Boston MA (2020) Available from: http://www.rstudio.com/ Clegg A, Young J, Iliffe S, Rikkert MO, Rockwood K (2013) Frailty in elderly people. Lancet Lond Engl 381(9868):752–762 Cesari M, Prince M, Thiyagarajan JA, De Carvalho IA, Bernabei R, Chan P et al (2016) Frailty: An Emerging Public Health Priority. J Am Med Dir Assoc 17(3):188–192 Kwak D, Thompson LV (2021) Frailty: Past, present, and future? Sports Med Health Sci 3(1):1–10 Rockwood K, Mitnitski A (2007) Frailty in Relation to the Accumulation of Deficits. J Gerontol Biol Sci Med Sci 62(7):722–727 Khezrian M, Myint PK, McNeil C, Murray AD (2017) A Review of Frailty Syndrome and Its Physical, Cognitive and Emotional Domains in the Elderly. Geriatrics 2(4):36 Lameirinhas J, Gorostiaga A, Etxeberria I (2024) Definition and assessment of psychological frailty in older adults: A scoping review. Ageing Res Rev 100:102442 Dlima SD, Hall A, Aminu AQ, Akpan A, Todd C, Vardy ERLC (2024) Frailty: a global health challenge in need of local action. BMJ Glob Health 9(8):e015173 Liu Y, Gong L, Niu H, Jiang F, Du S, Jiang Y (2024) Health system efficiency and equity in ASEAN: an empirical investigation. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 22(1):86 Peters GJY. Why not to use the journal impact factor as a criterion for the selection of junior researchers: A comment on Bornmann and, Williams (2017) J Informetr. 2017;11(3):888–91 Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6726214","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":460527556,"identity":"64df0d8e-10e8-45e4-9e51-f0fda89b392c","order_by":0,"name":"Mukesh Kumar Barik","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Swami Vivekanand National Institute for Rehabilitation Training and Research (SVNIRTAR), Cuttack, India","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mukesh","middleName":"Kumar","lastName":"Barik","suffix":""},{"id":460527557,"identity":"5562ddfd-19cd-4904-b378-077c32da8bff","order_by":1,"name":"Manish Barik","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"IMPACT Global Consulting, New Delhi, India","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Manish","middleName":"","lastName":"Barik","suffix":""},{"id":460527558,"identity":"b36ef065-c66f-4a66-85b7-1bdfe14ec453","order_by":2,"name":"Arjeet Samal","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Dhenkanal Academy of Medical Sciences, Odisha, India","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Arjeet","middleName":"","lastName":"Samal","suffix":""},{"id":460527559,"identity":"893edf6b-842e-4348-b4fc-a500fe3883e5","order_by":3,"name":"Sushree Nibedita Panda","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"The George Institute for Global Health, India","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sushree","middleName":"Nibedita","lastName":"Panda","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-05-22 15:06:44","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":false,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"humanSubjectConsent":false,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6726214/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6726214/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":83429676,"identity":"ae89709f-485d-4fee-abe8-ebf4488040d6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-26 06:30:42","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":24833,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe selection of articles in the study\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6726214/v1/40103e56972581f034123863.jpg"},{"id":83429679,"identity":"334669b5-e0e1-4fd5-a33c-907f8d32e90c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-26 06:30:42","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":41579,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTrends of publications of Frailty research trend between 2010-2025\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6726214/v1/f79edc1d10cbc8c6612d74b8.png"},{"id":83429682,"identity":"6353e53f-14a2-4237-b46d-c141eacca2c3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-26 06:30:42","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":101773,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6726214/v1/bb0ad2037d2b4e24d98f8bb1.png"},{"id":83430682,"identity":"48d07c9e-48b6-4205-9b45-6d643cc84977","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-26 06:54:47","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":920933,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6726214/v1/588238e4-ac27-4c69-bc41-38c865485bc9.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMapping the Research Landscape of Frailty: A 15-Year (2010-2025) Bibliometric Study on PubMed database\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eFrailty, a multidimensional syndrome characterized by reduced physiological reserves and increased vulnerability to adverse health outcomes, has become a critical area of research in aging and geriatrics\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. It has been shown that those who are frail are predisposed to various negative health outcomes, such as falls, fractures, hospitalisation, nursing home placement, disability, poor quality of life and dementia mostly among older adults\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. As frailty is an age-related condition, it poses significant threats to global healthy ageing goals. The world is experiencing a major demographic transition, with the number of older people aged\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;60 projected to double by 2050 \u003csup\u003e5\u0026ndash;8\u003c/sup\u003e. With the global population aging rapidly, understanding frailty has become essential for healthcare systems worldwide to manage the burden of age-related diseases effectively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOver the past decade and a half, the scientific interest in frailty has grown exponentially. Researchers have investigated its underlying mechanisms, clinical manifestations, and interventions to mitigate its effects\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Concurrently, there has been a shift in focus from traditional healthcare paradigms to more holistic, patient-centered approaches that consider frailty's physical, cognitive, and psychosocial dimensions\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR10 CR11\" citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. This broadening scope reflects the evolving understanding of frailty as not just a geriatric syndrome but also a public health challenge requiring multidisciplinary attention\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBibliometric analysis is a powerful tool for assessing research trends, mapping the intellectual landscape, and identifying gaps in the existing literature\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. By examining publication patterns, influential authors, institutions, and collaborative networks, bibliometric studies provide valuable insights into the trajectory of scientific research on a given topic\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. While existing studies provide valuable insights into specific intersections\u0026mdash;such as social frailty, frailty and heart failure, chronic kidney disease (CKD) with frailty, frailty and sarcopenia, and frailty with multimorbidity\u0026mdash;there is no comprehensive evaluation of frailty as a holistic concept encompassing its diverse dimensions\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR18 CR19 CR20\" citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study aims to fill this gap by analyzing publications indexed in PubMed from 2010 to 2025. Through this analysis, we seek to provide an overview of the global research landscape on frailty, highlight key contributors and themes, and identify emerging trends that could guide future investigations. Understanding these trends is crucial for fostering collaboration, optimizing resource allocation, and advancing knowledge in this emerging area of health and aging research.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe PubMed database, which contains the world\u0026rsquo;s leading scholarly journals in medical sciences, was selected as the data source for this study. The literature related to frailty was searched from 2010 to 10 January 2025. The search terms and strategy were: (frail*) AND \u0026ldquo;Older adults\u0026rdquo;. To examine the effectiveness of the search results, one researcher assessed the relevance, to this study, of the top 100 most recently published articles. The results showed that 86% were related to frailty, indicating that the search terms and strategies were appropriate.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInclusion criteria were: (a) peer-reviewed original articles on frailty; (b) reviews related to frailty; (d) articles published from 2010 to 2025; and (e) articles published in English. Articles collected by hand, repeated publications, conference abstracts, and book chapters were excluded from the bibliometric analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe bibliometric data analysis was conducted using the Biblioshiny application, which provides a web interface for Bibliometrix \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, an open-source tool used for quantitative research in bibliometrics, utilizing RStudio version 4.4.1 \u003csup\u003e23\u003c/sup\u003e. In this study, the overall performance of the research components was analysed based on three criteria: sources, authors, and documents. The final analysis focused on the ten most relevant journals and authors, the author and the most productive countries and institutions.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study identified (Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e )4594 publications about frailty published in PubMed between 2010 and 2025. This investigation revealed that 24,087 authors contributed to producing 4594 manuscripts published in 1109 journals. The average co-author per documents is 7\u0026ndash;8 authors. and international co-authorship percentages is 18.1% in Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e .\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe summary of the findings\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTimespan\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2010- January 2025\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSources (Journals, Books, etc)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1109\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDocuments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4594\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnnual Growth Rate %\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-4.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDocument Average Age\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors count\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAuthors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24087\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAuthors of single-authored docs\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e156\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors contribution\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSingle-authored docs\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e177\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCo-Authors per Doc\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInternational co-authorships %\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePublication trend between 2010\u0026ndash;2025 in Frailty\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe analysis of frailty research publications over the past 15 years reveals significant trends and insights. The number of articles steadily increased from 2010, with 73 publications, to a peak of 531 in 2021. Notably, there was a sharp rise in publications from 2014 to 2016, with growth rates exceeding 44% annually, indicating a pivotal period for frailty research. However, the trend plateaued between 2019 and 2021, followed by a noticeable decline in 2022 and 2023, with only 355 and 322 articles published, respectively. Interestingly, 2024 saw a significant resurgence in publications, with 547 articles, the highest in the study period. The total number of publications during this period was 4,594, with an average of 287 articles annually (Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eProductivity of the frailty research country wise\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn \u003cstrong\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;2\u003c/strong\u003e, Italy led global frailty research with 3,612 publications, followed by the United States (2,789) and Canada (2,336), highlighting significant contributions from North America and Europe. Japan (2,298) and China (2,177) demonstrated robust research activity from Asia but somewhat skewed in both the country than whole Asia. Spain (2,081), Australia (1,701), and European nations such as the Netherlands (1,670), France (1,640), and Germany (1,069) also made substantial contributions. From \u003cstrong\u003eFig.\u0026nbsp;3\u003c/strong\u003e, it is evident that frailty-related research has been predominantly conducted in North America, Europe, and Oceania, with limited contributions from the African continent, South America, and parts of Asia.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCountry wise publication\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCountry\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNo. of articles\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eItaly\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3612\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnited State of America\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2789\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCanada\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2336\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJapan\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2298\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChina\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2177\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSpain\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2081\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAustralia\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1701\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNetherlands\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1670\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrance\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1640\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGermany\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1069\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eContribution as corresponding author\u0026rsquo;s affiliate country\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e The United States leads in corresponding author contributions with 607 articles (11.8%), reflecting its strong research infrastructure and global influence in frailty research. Italy follows with 364 articles (7.1%), while Canada (5.3%), China (4.8%), and Japan (4.7%) also demonstrate significant engagement. Australia and the Netherlands, both contributing 4.6%, along with Spain (3.8%), France (3.3%), and Germany (2.2%), highlight active participation from diverse regions.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;3\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCorresponding authors country\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCountry\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal no. articles\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e% of articles\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnited State of America\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e607\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eItaly\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e364\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCanada\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e275\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChina\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e248\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJapan\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e240\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAustralia\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e238\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNetherlands\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e236\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSpain\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e196\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrance\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e171\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGermany\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e114\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eTop 10 most productive institutes in Frailty research\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe University of Toronto leads in frailty research contributions with 245 articles, closely followed by McMaster University (243) and the University of Alberta (206), showcasing Canada\u0026rsquo;s prominence in this field. Dalhousie University (177) and the University of Ottawa (167) further highlight Canada\u0026rsquo;s strong academic influence. Monash University (164) and the University of Oxford (160) represent significant contributions from Australia and the UK, respectively. Prominent U.S. institutions, such as the University of California (158) and Harvard Medical School (149), along with the University of Leeds (148) in Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;4\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTop 10 Productive institutes in Frailty research\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAffiliation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eArticles\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity of Toronto\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e245\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMcMaster University\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e243\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity of Alberta\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e206\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDalhousie University\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e177\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity of Ottawa\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e167\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMonash University\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e164\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity of Oxford\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e160\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity of California\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e158\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHarvard Medical School\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e149\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity of Leeds\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e148\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eMost relevant journals in the frailty research\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnalysis revealed in Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, the top ten journals publishing frailty-related research. BMC Geriatrics led with 207 articles, followed by the Journal of The American Medical Directors Association (119), Age and Ageing (116), and the Journal of The American Geriatrics Society (101). Notable sources include Aging Clinical and Experimental Research (78), Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics (75), Journal of Geriatric Oncology (73), Clinical Interventions in Aging (64), Geriatrics \u0026amp; Gerontology International (64), and Nutrients (64).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 5: Most relevant journals in the frailty research\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Taba\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSources\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eArticles\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBMC Geriatrics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e207\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJournal of The American Medical Directors Association\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e119\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge and Ageing\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e116\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJournal of The American Geriatrics Society\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e101\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAging Clinical and Experimental Research\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eArchives of Gerontology and Geriatrics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJournal of Geriatric Oncology\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e73\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eClinical Interventions in Aging\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e64\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGeriatrics \u0026amp; Gerontology International\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e64\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNutrients\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e64\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe current bibliometric analysis highlights an evolving and increasingly significant research landscape on frailty over the past 15 years. The steady increase in publications\u0026mdash;from 73 in 2010 to a peak of 531 in 2021 and a resurgence to 547 in 2024 underscores the growing recognition of frailty as a complex, multidimensional syndrome that poses significant challenges to global healthy aging initiatives (24\u0026ndash;26).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis upward trajectory in publication output, particularly the rapid expansion observed between 2014 and 2016 with annual growth rates exceeding 44%, reflects not only the escalating prevalence of age-related health issues but also the broadening conceptual framework of frailty. Historically, frailty was narrowly conceptualized; however, contemporary research increasingly embraces its physical, cognitive, and psychosocial dimensions \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR28\" citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. This multidimensional perspective has catalyzed interdisciplinary collaborations that enhance our understanding of frailty beyond traditional geriatric paradigms.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeographically, the analysis reveals that frailty research is predominantly concentrated in developed regions, with Italy, the United States, and Canada emerging as leading contributors. Italy\u0026rsquo;s high volume of publications (3,612) and the United States\u0026rsquo; notable role as the corresponding author country (607 articles, 11.8%) indicate strong research infrastructures and a high level of engagement with frailty-related issues. These findings align with global demographic trends where aging populations are most prominent in developed countries, driving focused academic and clinical investigations into frailty\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. In contrast, contributions from regions such as Africa, South America, and parts of Asia remain limited, suggesting potential disparities in research investment and healthcare resource allocation\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInstitutional productivity further supports the notion that collaborative research networks are vital for advancing the field. Canadian institutions such as the University of Toronto, McMaster University, and the University of Alberta lead in research output, highlighting the country\u0026rsquo;s robust academic environment and commitment to addressing frailty. The involvement of globally recognized institutions such as Harvard Medical School, the University of Oxford, and the University of Leeds underscores the international collaboration imperative for tackling the multidimensional challenges of frailty\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStudy implication:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe bibliometric study on frailty research has significant implications for advancing both scientific inquiry and healthcare policy. Our findings highlight an exponential increase in frailty-related publications, concentrated primarily in developed regions such as North America and Europe. This indicates that while considerable progress has been made, there is a critical need to extend research efforts to underrepresented areas, including Africa, South America, and parts of Asia, to address global disparities in healthy aging. The identification of key authors, institutions, and collaborative networks provides a strategic roadmap for future research, emphasizing the importance of multidisciplinary and international partnerships. Moreover, the shift toward multidimensional assessments of frailty reinforces the need for integrated clinical approaches that enhance early detection and intervention. These insights can inform funding priorities and policy decisions aimed at optimizing resource allocation for comprehensive geriatric care\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e\u003cb\u003eStrength and limitation\u003c/b\u003e:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrengths of this study include its comprehensive bibliometric approach that captures global research trends on frailty over a 15-year period. By analyzing 4,594 publications from PubMed, the study maps the evolution of frailty research, identifies key authors, institutions, and collaborative networks, and highlights the shift toward multidimensional assessments of frailty. The use of robust analytical tools such as Bibliometrix and Biblioshiny enhances data visualization and provides quantitative insights to support strategic research planning. However, limitations include reliance on a single database (PubMed), which may have excluded relevant literature from other sources. The search strategy\u0026rsquo;s focus on English-language articles and exclusion of grey literature could lead to selection bias. Additionally, bibliometric indicators do not capture the qualitative impact or contextual nuances of research. Future studies should integrate multiple databases and qualitative assessments to further enhance the comprehensiveness and understanding of frailty research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis bibliometric analysis reveals a robust growth in frailty research over the past 15 years, reflecting its emerging significance in global health. Dominated by contributions from developed nations, the study underscores the need for enhanced international collaboration and broader geographic representation. The findings highlight critical trends, influential research networks, and evolving conceptualizations, thereby providing a foundation for future studies aimed at developing integrated approaches to manage frailty and robustly promote healthy aging worldwide.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor contributions:\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConcept and design-; MB and SNP. Acquisition, statistical analysis, or interpretation of data: MB, MKB, AS and SNP. Drafting of the manuscript: MKB, AS and SNP. Monitored analysis and critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: MB, SNP, AS and MKB Administrative and technical support: MB. Supervision: MB and SNP. All the authors reviewed the manuscript. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of Data and Material\u003c/strong\u003e: All the data included in this analysis were publicly available database.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting Interest:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eNone\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical Approval:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eNot required\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInformed consent:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eConsent to participate\u0026nbsp;is\u0026nbsp;not needed,\u0026nbsp;as the data used\u0026nbsp;are\u0026nbsp;secondary and freely accessible on the internet. All methods adhered to relevant guidelines and regulations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e: Not required\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eWe declare that we have no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgments\u003c/strong\u003e: Not Applicable\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMorley JE, Vellas B, Van Abellan G, Anker SD, Bauer JM, Bernabei R et al (2013) Frailty Consensus: A Call to Action. J Am Med Dir Assoc 14(6):392\u0026ndash;397\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLeng S, Chen X, Mao G (2014) Frailty syndrome: an overview. Clin Interv Aging. ;433\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKojima G, Iliffe S, Walters K (2018) Frailty index as a predictor of mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Age Ageing 47(2):193\u0026ndash;200\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHoogendijk EO, Afilalo J, Ensrud KE, Kowal P, Onder G, Fried LP (2019) Frailty: implications for clinical practice and public health. Lancet 394(10206):1365\u0026ndash;1375\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWorld Health Organization Ageing and health [Internet]. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePadeiro M, Santana P, Grant M Global aging and health determinants in a changing world. In: Aging [Internet]. Elsevier; 2023 [cited 2025 Jan 10]. pp. 3\u0026ndash;30. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/B9780128237618000215\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/B9780128237618000215\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHowlett SE, Rutenberg AD, Rockwood K (2021) The degree of frailty as a translational measure of health in aging. Nat Aging 1(8):651\u0026ndash;665\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFulop T, Larbi A, Witkowski JM, McElhaney J, Loeb M, Mitnitski A et al (2010) Aging, frailty and age-related diseases. Biogerontology 11(5):547\u0026ndash;563\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSugimoto T, Arai H, Sakurai T (2022) An update on cognitive frailty: Its definition, impact, associated factors and underlying mechanisms, and interventions. Geriatr Gerontol Int 22(2):99\u0026ndash;109\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDent E, Hanlon P, Sim M, Jylh\u0026auml;v\u0026auml; J, Liu Z, Vetrano DL et al (2023) Recent developments in frailty identification, management, risk factors and prevention: A narrative review of leading journals in geriatrics and gerontology. Ageing Res Rev 91:102082\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGabutti I, Mascia D, Cicchetti A (2017) Exploring patient-centered hospitals: a systematic review to understand change. BMC Health Serv Res 17(1):364\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBokhour BG, Fix GM, Mueller NM, Barker AM, Lavela SL, Hill JN et al (2018) How can healthcare organizations implement patient-centered care? Examining a large-scale cultural transformation. BMC Health Serv Res 18(1):168\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRockwood K, Howlett SE (2018) Fifteen years of progress in understanding frailty and health in aging. BMC Med 16(1):220 s12916-018-1223\u0026ndash;3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eManoj Kumar L, George RJ (2023) A. Bibliometric Analysis for Medical Research. Indian J Psychol Med 45(3):277\u0026ndash;282\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDonthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D, Pandey N, Lim WM (2021) How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. J Bus Res 133:285\u0026ndash;296\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u0026Ouml;zt\u0026uuml;rk O, Kocaman R, Kanbach DK (2024) How to design bibliometric research: an overview and a framework proposal. Rev Manag Sci 18(11):3333\u0026ndash;3361\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYuan G, Yang Y, Lin Y, Lin J, Wu Y (2024) Current status and development trends in CKD with frailty research from 2000 to 2021: a bibliometric analysis. Ren Fail 46(1):2292142\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYe L, Liang R, Liu X, Li J, Yue J, Zhang X (2023) Frailty and sarcopenia: A bibliometric analysis of their association and potential targets for intervention. Ageing Res Rev 92:102111\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDeng P, Liu C, Chen M, Si L (2023) Knowledge domain and emerging trends in multimorbidity and frailty research from 2003 to 2023: a scientometric study using citespace and VOSviewer. Health Econ Rev 13(1):46\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang N, Qu X, Kang L, Liu X, Zhu W Mapping Knowledge Landscapes and Emerging Trends of the Links Between Frailty and Heart Failure: A Bibliometric Analysis From 2000 to 2023. Cureus [Internet]. 2024 May 17 [cited 2025 Jan 10]; Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.cureus.com/articles/254497-mapping-knowledge-landscapes-and-emerging-trends-of-the-links-between-frailty-and-heart-failure-a-bibliometric-analysis-from-2000-to-2023\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.cureus.com/articles/254497-mapping-knowledge-landscapes-and-emerging-trends-of-the-links-between-frailty-and-heart-failure-a-bibliometric-analysis-from-2000-to-2023\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang H, Chen X, Zheng M, Wu Y, Liu L (2024) Research status and hotspots of social frailty in older adults: a bibliometric analysis from 2003 to 2022. Front Aging Neurosci 16:1409155\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAria M, Cuccurullo C (2017) bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J Informetr 11(4):959\u0026ndash;975\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e[Internet]. RStudio, PBC, RStudio Team, Boston MA (2020) Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://www.rstudio.com/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://www.rstudio.com/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eClegg A, Young J, Iliffe S, Rikkert MO, Rockwood K (2013) Frailty in elderly people. Lancet Lond Engl 381(9868):752\u0026ndash;762\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCesari M, Prince M, Thiyagarajan JA, De Carvalho IA, Bernabei R, Chan P et al (2016) Frailty: An Emerging Public Health Priority. J Am Med Dir Assoc 17(3):188\u0026ndash;192\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKwak D, Thompson LV (2021) Frailty: Past, present, and future? Sports Med Health Sci 3(1):1\u0026ndash;10\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRockwood K, Mitnitski A (2007) Frailty in Relation to the Accumulation of Deficits. J Gerontol Biol Sci Med Sci 62(7):722\u0026ndash;727\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKhezrian M, Myint PK, McNeil C, Murray AD (2017) A Review of Frailty Syndrome and Its Physical, Cognitive and Emotional Domains in the Elderly. Geriatrics 2(4):36\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLameirinhas J, Gorostiaga A, Etxeberria I (2024) Definition and assessment of psychological frailty in older adults: A scoping review. Ageing Res Rev 100:102442\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDlima SD, Hall A, Aminu AQ, Akpan A, Todd C, Vardy ERLC (2024) Frailty: a global health challenge in need of local action. BMJ Glob Health 9(8):e015173\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiu Y, Gong L, Niu H, Jiang F, Du S, Jiang Y (2024) Health system efficiency and equity in ASEAN: an empirical investigation. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 22(1):86\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeters GJY. Why not to use the journal impact factor as a criterion for the selection of junior researchers: A comment on Bornmann and, Williams (2017) J Informetr. 2017;11(3):888\u0026ndash;91\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Frailty, research trend, bibliometric, ageing","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6726214/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6726214/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBackground: \u003c/strong\u003eFrailty, a multidimensional syndrome characterized by reduced physiological reserves and increased vulnerability to adverse outcomes, poses significant challenges to healthy aging worldwide. Despite growing interest in frailty research, a comprehensive bibliometric evaluation addressing its holistic dimensions remains lacking. This study aimed to map global research trends, key contributors, and emerging themes in frailty research from 2010 to 2025.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethods\u003c/strong\u003e: A systematic bibliometric analysis was conducted using the PubMed database. The search strategy employed to capture relevant literature published between 2010 and January 2025. A total of 4,594 publications were identified, involving 24,087 authors across 1,109 journals. Parameters such as publication counts and top influential journals and corresponding author contributions were examined to provide a comprehensive overview of the field.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults: \u003c/strong\u003eThe analysis demonstrated a consistent increase in frailty-related publications over the 15-year period, with a remarkable surge between 2014 and 2016 marked by annual growth rates exceeding 44%. The number of publications peaked at 531 in 2021, followed by a brief decline in 2022 and 2023, and a subsequent resurgence in 2024 with 547 articles. Geographically, research output was dominated by developed regions, with Italy leading in overall productivity (3,612 publications), followed by significant contributions from the United States and Canada. The corresponding author analysis revealed that the United States contributed 11.8% of publications, Prominent institutions included the University of Toronto, and McMaster University\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConclusion: \u003c/strong\u003eThis bibliometric study provides a detailed mapping of the global frailty research landscape, highlighting evolving trends, key contributors, and the shift towards multidimensional assessment frameworks.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Mapping the Research Landscape of Frailty: A 15-Year (2010-2025) Bibliometric Study on PubMed database","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-05-26 06:30:38","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6726214/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"2294d54e-dbe1-4e40-8533-61477bf89a26","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 26th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":48919815,"name":"Geriatrics \u0026 Gerontology"},{"id":48919816,"name":"Physical Medicine \u0026 Rehab"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-05-26T06:30:38+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-05-26 06:30:38","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6726214","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6726214","identity":"rs-6726214","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}