Gökberk Gözükan

Dr. Gökberk Gözükan

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

1Year (2026-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
29 September 2026 in Clinical and Translational Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
GGGökberk Gözükan
Gökberk Gözükan
IKIRFAN KARAHAN
IRFAN KARAHAN
SBSadiye Visal Buturak
Sadiye Visal Buturak
SYSelim Yalcin
Selim Yalcin
OCOya Coskun
Oya Coskun
UCUgur Coskun
Ugur Coskun

10 July 2026 in Medicina
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SBSerap Boz
Serap Boz
ADAyse Dikmeer
Ayse Dikmeer
RDRana Tuna Dogrul
Rana Tuna Dogrul
KEKübra Erdoğan
Kübra Erdoğan
GGGökberk Gözükan
Gökberk Gözükan
KSKamile Silay
Kamile Silay
Background and Objectives: This study aimed to translate and culturally adapt the Pictorial Fit–Frail Scale (PFFS) into Turkish and to evaluate its validity and reliability in older adults. Materials and Methods: The study included 156 community-dwelling older adults aged ≥ 65 years. Frailty status was determined using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), and participants with a CFS ≥ 4 were classified as frail. All participants underwent the PFFS, Katz ADL, Lawton–Brody IADL, Short-Form Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), Mini Nutritional Assessment—Short Form (MNA-SF), Standardized Mini-Mental State Examination (SMMSE), and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). The reliability of the PFFS was assessed using internal consistency (Cronbach α), inter-rater reliability, and test–retest reliability (ICC); its construct validity was assessed using correlation analysis with the CFS. Furthermore, the diagnostic performance of PFFS in identifying frailty was analyzed using the ROC curve. Results: Of the 156 individuals participating in the study, 63.5% were women, and 89 individuals (57.1%) were frail. The Turkish version of PFFS showed high internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.838). Inter-rater and test–retest reliability were found to be ICC = 0.995 and 0.996, respectively. A strong and positive correlation was found between PFFS and CFS scores (Spearman r = 0.760, p < 0.001). ROC analysis showed that PFFS had good performance in distinguishing frailty (AUC = 0.851, optimal cut-off ≥ 14; sensitivity = 69.7%, specificity = 83.6%). Frail individuals were older, had higher comorbidities, and showed greater dependence in activities of daily living. Conclusions: The Turkish version of the PFFS appears to be a reliable, valid, rapid, and multidimensional tool for assessing frailty in older adults. The PFFS can contribute to the effective assessment of frailty in clinical practice and research.

30 September 2026 in Journal of Endocrinological Investigation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
GGGökberk Gözükan
Gökberk Gözükan
BTBusra Tunc Topuz
Busra Tunc Topuz
CTCeren Tufan
Ceren Tufan
ESEmre Sedar Saygılı
Emre Sedar Saygılı
EKErsen Karakilic
Ersen Karakilic