A214 CONSTRUCTION AND VALIDATION OF A FRAILTY INDEX FOR THE INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE POPULATION
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Frailty can be defined as a state of vulnerability to adverse health events, resulting from a reduction in physiological processes that are protective for health. Measuring frailty in populations with chronic immune-mediated disease, such as Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD), is becoming increasingly important. A Frailty Index (FI) operates within the Deficits Accumulation model and is a valid and accepted method of measuring frailty. Much of the work done in the field of frailty and IBD describes the association of frailty with post-operative complications and mortality. These studies have used various methods to determine a patient’s degree of frailty such as use of ICD codes and claims-based scoring. Aims: Aims To develop an FI for the IBD patient population using an accumulation of deficits approach. Methods A standardized method for constructing an FI using data from the SPOR IMAGINE IBD cohort was applied to a pan-Canadian, observational prospective study. Seventy-seven deficits were selected to be incorporated into the index, most from psychological or gastrointestinal variables. Construct and content validity of the index was assessed. The index was trichotomized based on established cut points and was then compared to patient demographics in the baseline cohort. Results An IBD Frailty Index (FI) was created using a validated 10 step process with baseline data from 2714 participants in the SPOR IMAGINE cohort. The IBD FI is made up of 77 items, and is primarily composed of physical, functional and psychological health deficits. The IBD FI showed a right skew, which is characteristic of most FIs. In this distribution the upper limit (99th percentile) of FI score is 0.529 displaying a submaximal limit, and the mean FI score was higher in women (0.19) (95% CI: 0.13, 0.15] compared to men (0.14), which are characteristic to valid FI tools. The mean age of our cohort was 45.8 years (SD: 15), mean FI score was 0.17 (SD: 0.12) (lower than in other immune mediated diseases), and 30.6% of our sample was categorized as frail (FI score >0.21). Surprisingly the IBD FI scores were not positively associated with age, though they were associated with IBD symptom severity (R=0.767). Conclusions Frailty is an important health measure that provides a holistic picture of an individual’s health. We operationalized the accumulation of deficits approach to frailty and created a frailty measurement tool for the IBD population using variables from a wide variety of health domains. Future research projects using the IBD FI should investigate the scores’ predictive abilities for mortality and should explore the differences in frailty between patients diagnosed in middle of life (first epidemiological peak) versus later in life. Funding Agencies None
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,010 | 0,026 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».