Self‐Reported Outcomes in Individuals Aged 65 and Older Admitted for Treatment to an Acute Care Surgical Service: A 6‐Month Prospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To examine health-related quality of life (HRQL) and cognitive and functional status before and after emergency surgical care in elderly adults. DESIGN: Six-month prospective cohort study. SETTING: Acute care and emergency surgery service at a single, academic tertiary care center, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Admitted individuals aged 65 and older (mean age 77.8 ± 7.9, 52% female) or their surrogates. MEASUREMENTS: Abbreviated Mental Test Score-4 (AMTS), Barthel Index, Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13), and EuroQol-5 Dimensional Scale (EQ-5D) completed by participants or their surrogates within 24 hours of admission to the hospital and 6 months after discharge. Paired t-tests and McNemar tests were used to assess the difference between baseline and 6 months. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-five consecutive individuals (including 16 surrogates) were enrolled. Sixteen (10%) died within 6 months of discharge, and 116 (75%, including 18 surrogates) completed a follow-up assessment 6 months after discharge. Cognitive status improved substantially over 6 months, with 72 (52%) of participants having AMTS scores showing cognitive impairment at baseline and four (4%) having AMTS scores showing cognitive impairment at 6 months (P < .001). There was no statistically significant change from baseline on the Barthel Index, VES-13, or EQ-5D. CONCLUSION: There was significant cognitive improvement in older adults after surgical hospitalization. HRQL improved back to age-matched population norms. These results suggest that elderly adults admitted for emergency surgery have good cognitive, functional, and HRQL outcomes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".