Long‐Term Risks of Death and Institutionalization of Elderly People in Relation to Deficit Accumulation at Age 70
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To measure relative fitness and frailty in older people without specific frailty instruments and to relate that measurement to long-term health outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort studies. SETTING: Two population-based studies of people aged approximately 70 at baseline and followed up to 10 years (in the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA)) or 26 years in the Gothenburg H-70 cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Nine hundred sixty-two men and 1,178 women. MEASUREMENTS: Deficit accumulation (the exposure) was counted using self-reported (CSHA) or clinically designated (H-70) symptoms, signs, diseases, and disabilities. Relative fitness and frailty were measured in relation to the degree of deficit accumulation evaluated in four quartiles, representing those most fit to those most frail. The items that made up the frailty index were selected randomly without replacement in 1,000 iterations. The outcomes were risks of death or residential long-term care. RESULTS: Worse frailty, however measured, was associated with worse survival; the Kaplan-Meier curves of random iterations of the frailty definition showed virtually no interquartile overlap for mortality. For any given level of frailty, men died younger than women. Worse frailty was also associated with a higher risk of institutionalization. CONCLUSION: Frailty appears to be a robust concept that is readily operationalized, with the risk of adverse outcomes being largely established by age 70.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".