Cognitive frailty in patients with acute coronary syndromes: A scoping review
5 affiliations
- 1School of Nursing, Shanxi University of Chinese Medicine, Jinzhong, Shanxi, China.
- 2Department of Central Laboratory, Shanxi Province Cancer Hospital, Taiyuan, Shanxi, China.
- 3Jining No.1 People's Hospital, Jining, Shandong, China.
- 4Shanxi Province Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Taiyuan, Shanxi, China.
- 5Emergency Department, Shanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Taiyuan, Shanxi, China.
Abstract
Aims: To address a critical knowledge gap, this is the first scoping review to systematically map and describe the evidence on cognitive frailty in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS), including its prevalence, assessment tools, associated factors, and clinical outcomes. Methods: The Joanna Briggs Institute methodology guided the conduct of this scoping review, which has been reported in line with the PRISMA-ScR checklist. Following the PCC framework, a systematic search was conducted across five databases: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science. The search was performed up to August 2026. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed quality. Results: A total of 9 studies were included. The prevalence of cognitive frailty ranged from 8% to 55%, the differences attributed to the heterogeneity of assessment tools and diagnostic criteria. Regarding assessment tools, the FRAIL scale combined with the Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire was the most commonly used combinations. Risk factors covered sociodemographic, physical health, and clinical domains. Prognostically, cognitive frailty was linked to higher composite short‑term (in‑hospital complications, prolonged stay, 30‑day events) and medium‑term (6‑month MACCE) risks, and also to elevated long‑term mortality and readmission. Conclusion: Cognitive frailty is commonly reported in patients with ACS, with considerable variation across studies, and an association with adverse outcomes has been noted in multiple reports. However, the lack of standardized assessment tools and criteria makes results difficult to compare and synthesize. Existing prospective studies have primarily relied on baseline measurements of cognitive frailty to predict subsequent outcomes, without repeated assessments over time. This limits the ability to characterise the dynamic trajectory of cognitive frailty during the ACS course. Future research should focus on longitudinal studies, the development of rapid screening tools, and the exploration of multidisciplinary interventions.
Related
- Reflections on the ESC consensus statement on inflammation in coronary syndromes: From mechanistic certainty to practical cardiology
- Artificial Intelligence in Chronic Coronary Syndromes: Linking Cellular Pathways to Precision Risk Prediction
- The Predictive Value of Serum Erythropoietin Levels Measured at Diagnosis in Patients With Myelodysplastic Syndromes
- Combination of Clinical Frailty Score and Myostatin Concentrations as Mortality Predictor in Hemodialysis Patients
- Video games in cognitive event-related EEG research: A scoping review
BibTeX
@article{he2026cognitive,
title = {{Cognitive frailty in patients with acute coronary syndromes: A scoping review}},
author = {Min He and Yifan Wu and Mengting Zhang and Yuan Chu and Jinbo Zhao and Zhiping Liu and Yongchao Hou},
journal = {PLOS One},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0361499},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0361499},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Cognitive frailty in patients with acute coronary syndromes: A scoping review
AU - Min He
AU - Yifan Wu
AU - Mengting Zhang
AU - Yuan Chu
AU - Jinbo Zhao
AU - Zhiping Liu
AU - Yongchao Hou
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/30
JO - PLOS One
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0361499
UR - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0361499
AB - Aims: To address a critical knowledge gap, this is the first scoping review to systematically map and describe the evidence on cognitive frailty in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS), including its prevalence, assessment tools, associated factors, and clinical outcomes. Methods: The Joanna Briggs Institute methodology guided the conduct of this scoping review, which has been reported in line with the PRISMA-ScR checklist. Following the PCC framework, a systematic search was conducted across five databases: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science. The search was performed up to August 2026. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed quality. Results: A total of 9 studies were included. The prevalence of cognitive frailty ranged from 8% to 55%, the differences attributed to the heterogeneity of assessment tools and diagnostic criteria. Regarding assessment tools, the FRAIL scale combined with the Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire was the most commonly used combinations. Risk factors covered sociodemographic, physical health, and clinical domains. Prognostically, cognitive frailty was linked to higher composite short‑term (in‑hospital complications, prolonged stay, 30‑day events) and medium‑term (6‑month MACCE) risks, and also to elevated long‑term mortality and readmission. Conclusion: Cognitive frailty is commonly reported in patients with ACS, with considerable variation across studies, and an association with adverse outcomes has been noted in multiple reports. However, the lack of standardized assessment tools and criteria makes results difficult to compare and synthesize. Existing prospective studies have primarily relied on baseline measurements of cognitive frailty to predict subsequent outcomes, without repeated assessments over time. This limits the ability to characterise the dynamic trajectory of cognitive frailty during the ACS course. Future research should focus on longitudinal studies, the development of rapid screening tools, and the exploration of multidisciplinary interventions.
SN - 1932-6203
ER -