Transitions in Frailty Status in Older Adults in Relation to Mobility: A Multistate Modeling Approach Employing a Deficit Count
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate how changes in frailty status and mortality risk relate to baseline frailty state, mobility performance, age, and sex. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: The Yale Precipitating Events Project, New Haven, Connecticut. PARTICIPANTS: Seven hundred fifty-four community-dwelling people aged 70 and older at baseline followed up at 18, 36, and 54 months. MEASUREMENTS: Frailty status, assessed at 18-month intervals, was defined using a frailty index (FI) as the number of deficits in 36 health variables. Mobility was defined as time in seconds on the rapid gait test, in which participants walked back and forth over a 20-foot course as quickly as possible. Multistate transition probabilities were calculated with baseline frailty, mobility, age, and sex estimated using Poisson and logistic regressions in survivors and those who died, respectively. RESULTS: In multivariable analyses, baseline frailty status and age were significantly associated with changes in frailty status and risk of death, whereas mobility was significantly associated with the frailty but not with mortality. At all values of the FI, participants with better mobility were more likely than those with poor mobility to remain stable or to improve. For example, at 54 months, 20.6% (95% confidence interval (CI)=16-25.2) of participants with poor mobility had the same or fewer deficits, compared with 32.4% (95% CI=27.9-36.9) of those with better mobility. CONCLUSION: A multistate transition model effectively measured the probability of change in frailty status and risk of death. Mobility, age, and baseline frailty were significant factors in frailty state transitions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".