## 2 Materials and Methods
### Analysis of Frailty Detection Methodologies  
Frailty is a complex and multifactorial condition that affects many older adults, characterized by a decline in physiological and cognitive function, decreased mobility, and increased vulnerability to stressors and disability. Several methods for detecting signs specific to frailty were developed and tested. Multiple reviews related to frailty measurements were conducted to better understand the concept of frailty [12; 13]. The most widely known and tested methodologies are the following:  
* Fried Frailty Phenotype;
* Rockwood Frailty Index;
* Groningen Frailty Indicator;
* Tilburg Frailty Indicator;
* Edmonton Frail Scale;
* FRAIL Scale.  
Most methodologies have common parameters that are used for frailty detection. Table 1 illustrates the most common parameters and their occurrence in the frailty detection methodologies mentioned. Although most parameters can be determined through predefined, subjective questionnaires dependent on the patient's response, their outcome can also be determined objectively using IoT systems.  
Detecting frailty is a complex task that requires measuring different metrics of physical, cognitive, social, and medical information. To develop a system capable of detecting signs that may indicate a person's frailty, it is necessary to determine the parameters that can be objectively measured. An analysis of how to determine the state of frailty was carried out based on the selected methodologies.  
The scoring mechanism for the selected methodologies is presented in Table 2. As can be observed, most methodologies use a specific scale by assigning a unit for the presence of a parameter (for example, if the patient unintentionally loses weight, the value is 1), with the final score being the sum of these values. In the case of the Tilburg indicator, 1 point is awarded for a 'Sometimes' response and 2 points for 'Yes'.  
In the case of the Rockwood Index, which can also be called the cumulative deficit index, frailty results from the accumulation of various health deficits over time, dependent on age and gender. To determine the index, a series of symptoms, signs, abnormal laboratory test values, functional impairments, and chronic diseases are defined, tailored to a target group under analysis. The frailty score is defined as a fraction between the  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Parameter** & **Fried Frailty** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Rockwood** \\ **Index** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Groningen** \\ **Indicator** \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Tilburg** \\ **Indicator** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Edmonton** \\ **Scale** \\ \end{tabular} & **FRAIL Scale** \\ \hline Unintentional Weight Loss & ✓ & & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ \\ \hline Physical Activity & ✓ & & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ \\ \hline Exhaustion or Fatigue & ✓ & & ✓ & & ✓ \\ \hline Cognitive Function & & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ & \\ \hline Psychological Health & & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ & \\ \hline Social Aspects & & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ & \\ \hline Multiple Health & ✓ & ✓ & & & \\ Issues/Chronic Diseases & & ✓ & ✓ & & \\ \hline Functional Independence & ✓ & ✓ & & ✓ & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Comparison of frailty detection methodologies in terms of parameters.  
sum of the present deficits (1--deficit present/0--deficit absent) and the total number of defined deficits.  
The methodologies for detecting vulnerability are methodologies that depend on the responses of the surveyed individuals. In this regard, the degree of precision of the result has a subjective character, requiring the surveyed person to remember relevant data.