Background/Objectives: Frailty-related vulnerability spans health, physical function, health behaviors, cognition, and psychological well-being. A single summary score may not fully convey how these features co-occur within individuals. This study identified data-driven frailty-related profiles among community-dwelling older adults and compared the magnitude of between-profile differences. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional secondary analysis of the 2023 National Survey of Older Koreans. The analytical sample included 9950 participants. Ten indicators—self-rated health, chronic disease count, 1-year weight loss, sleep quality, weekly exercise frequency, fatigue, stair-climbing ability, 300-m walking ability, cognitive function, and depressive symptoms—were standardized and entered into K-means clustering. Candidate solutions for K = 2–10 were evaluated using within-cluster sums of squares and mean silhouette coefficients. Profile characteristics and effect sizes were compared using independent-samples t-tests, Pearson’s chi-squared tests, Cohen’s d, and Cramér’s V. Results: The K = 2 solution had the highest mean silhouette coefficient (0.273) among the candidate solutions, indicating modest separation between clusters. Within the analytical sample, 6962 participants (70.0%) formed a lower-vulnerability profile and 2988 (30.0%) a multidimensional higher-vulnerability profile. The latter profile showed less favorable health, functional, psychological, and cognitive characteristics. Among the cluster-defining indicators, the largest descriptive differences were observed in 300-m walking (d = 2.013) and stair-climbing ability (d = 2.001). Conclusions: The two clusters represented a relative multidimensional vulnerability gradient rather than clearly distinct clinical phenotypes. Although the findings describe co-occurring vulnerability characteristics, their potential clinical utility requires independent and longitudinal validation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Choi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: