Predicting 12-Month Future Falls in People with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) has been previously linked to falls. However, there are no established tools to accurately predict falls in this population. Predicting whether an individual with COPD is at an increased likelihood of falling can help clinicians initiate early fall prevention interventions and mitigate the risk of falling. The main objective of this dissertation was to identify predictors of 12-month future falls in people with COPD that are potentially feasible for use in clinical settings. The first manuscript was a prospective cohort study among community-dwelling older adults with COPD, evaluating the reliability and validity of four balance measures: the Brief Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest), Single Leg Stance (SLS) test, Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, and TUG Dual-Task (TUG-DT) test. The results demonstrated that the four balance measures had excellent inter-rater and test-retest reliability but did not have evidence for predictive validity for predicting 12-month future falls in this population. Although these balance measures could not predict falls with sufficient accuracy, they may have a role in multifactorial fall risk assessment. The Brief BESTest and the SLS test may be better suited for identifying balance impairment, while the TUG and TUG-DT tests may be used to screen for mobility limitations. Overall, the results suggested that additional factors beyond balance should be considered to predict future falls in COPD. The second manuscript was a secondary analysis of prospectively collected data among individuals with COPD to develop and internally validate a clinical prediction model for 12-month future falls. A clinical prediction model with acceptable discrimination and calibration was identified. The model demonstrated that a higher likelihood of future falls can be predicted by a reported 12-month history of two or more falls, higher number of total chronic conditions, and worse TUG-DT test scores. The results highlight the need for external validation of the model to inform future application in different groups of people with COPD. The third manuscript was a secondary preliminary analysis of prospectively collected data among community-dwelling older adults with COPD to externally validate the clinical prediction model developed in the second manuscript. The clinical prediction model was externally validated and recalibrated, achieving acceptable calibration and discrimination. It was also demonstrated that the prediction model had superior clinical net benefit (i.e., more true positives and fewer false positives) when compared to screening for fall history alone, with decision thresholds set to 30-50% (the point at which the probability of an event is deemed actionable by a clinician). The results suggested that the clinical prediction model may be promising for detecting future falls in community-dwelling older adults and is superior to screening for fall history alone. However, the impact of the prediction model in clinical practice must be evaluated before it can be recommended outside of research settings. In conclusion, future falls in people with COPD are predicted by a 12-month history of two or more falls, a higher number of total chronic conditions, and worse mobility under cognitive demand as measured by the TUG-DT test. This work informs the future development of fall prevention guidelines for people with COPD.
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 | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 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 ».