Correlates of <scp>ADL</scp> difficulty in a large hemodialysis cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Needing assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) is an early indicator of functional decline and has important implications for individuals' quality of life. However, correlates of need for ADL assistance have received limited attention among patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis (HD). A multicenter cohort of 742 prevalent HD patients was assessed in 2009-2011 and classified as frail, prefrail and nonfrail by the Fried frailty index (recent unintentional weight loss, reported exhaustion, low grip strength, slow walk speed, low physical activity). Patients reported need for assistance with 4 ADL tasks and identified contributing symptoms/conditions (pain, balance, endurance, weakness, others). Nearly 1 in 5 patients needed assistance with 1 or more ADL. Multivariable analysis showed increased odds for needing ADL assistance among frail (odds ratio [OR] 11.35; 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.50-23.41; P < 0.001) and prefrail (OR 1.93; 95% CI 1.01-3.68; P = 0.046) compared with non-frail patients. In addition, the odds for needing ADL assistance were lower among blacks compared with whites and were higher among patients with diabetes, lung disease, and stroke. Balance, weakness, and "other" (frequently dialysis-related) symptoms/conditions were the most frequently named reasons for ADL difficulty. In addition to interventions such as increasing physical activity that might delay or reverse the process of frailty, the immediate symptoms/conditions to which individuals attribute their ADL difficulty may have clinical relevance for developing targeted management and/or treatment approaches.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".