Back

Explainable AI for Frailty and Fall Risk Prediction in Older Adults

Nobrega, T.; Santos, T.; Anjos, H.; Gomes, B.; Cunha, F.; Oliveira, P.; Baptista, R.; Pizarro, A.; Mota, J.; Goncalves, D. M.; Henriques, R.; Costa, R. S.

2026-03-22 health informatics
10.64898/2026.03.13.26347338 medRxiv
Show abstract

Frailty is a geriatric syndrome that reflects a state of increased vulnerability to endogenous and exogenous stressors, exposing individuals to a higher risk of premature death and adverse health outcomes. This work aims at identifying new determinants of frailty and improving screening tools for less studied clinical endpoints. To this end, we analyze a novel cohort provided by the Camara Municipal de Famalicao, comprising 2,862 participants and 6,855 observations across up to four assessment moments, and spanning sociodemographics, anthropometry, functional tests, cognitive assessments, quality of life, and fall history. We combine unsupervised clustering to explore heterogeneity with supervised prediction for falls, hospitalization, and handgrip strength, using explainability approaches to connect model outputs to clinically meaningful patterns. Outcome-agnostic clustering separates functional profiles ranging from robust to vulnerable that align a posteriori with different fall burdens, while outcome-aware clustering further identifies a high-risk subgroup characterized by poorer mobility, endurance and greater reliance on mobility assistance. Supervised models achieve moderate and consistent discrimination for fall prediction (AUROC{approx} 0.66-0.68), and explainability approaches consistently emphasize key drivers including handgrip strength, self-report assessments, and other results from functional tests. Handgrip regression attains MAE{approx} 3.6 kg (R2{approx} 0.49), while a dedicated CatBoost sarcopenia classifier improves detection (AUROC = 0.798, recall = 0.792) at the cost of low precision, consistent with screening-oriented use. Overall, the results support the feasibility of explainable AI for actionable risk stratification in community assessments, while highlighting constraints related to missingness, class imbalance, and selection bias toward an active cohort.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Age and Ageing
27 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.8%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 5%
10.4%
3
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
7.0%
4
GeroScience
97 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
7.0%
5
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
5.0%
6
Annals of Neurology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.7%
7
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 47%
2.1%
8
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 46%
2.1%
9
Aging Cell
144 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
50% of probability mass above
10
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
11
The Journals of Gerontology, Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
12
European Journal of Epidemiology
40 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
13
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
14
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
15
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
16
Experimental Neurology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.4%
17
The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.4%
18
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
19
The Journals of Gerontology: Series A
25 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.3%
20
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
21
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
22
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.0%
23
Experimental Gerontology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
24
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
25
Aging
69 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
26
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
27
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
28
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 18%
0.9%
29
Biological Psychiatry
119 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
30
npj Aging
15 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%