Exponential Increases in the Prevalence of Disability in the Oldest Old: A Canadian National Survey
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As most studies generally treat all 85+ year-olds as a homogeneous group, little is known about the specific disabilities of the oldest old population, those aged 90 and older. OBJECTIVE: To estimate age-specific prevalence of disability in activities of daily living for older Canadians, including the oldest old, those aged 90 and older. METHODS: Cross-sectional national survey with a representative sample of noninstitutionalized Canadians aged between 50 and 104 years old (n = 28,406). Disability was self-reported and defined as needing assistance to perform self-care and domestic life activities. RESULTS: The prevalence of disability increased with age, and the rise appeared exponential when considering the oldest old. At age 90, the highest estimated rates of disability were reported for housekeeping (50%), shopping (45%) and transportation (44%), and 21% reported requiring assistance for washing themselves. Compared to the 85-89 age group, the estimated proportion of people reporting disability in the 95+ age group approximately triples for self-care activities and doubles for domestic life activities. CONCLUSION: Even if we knew that disability increases with age, we can now state that it increases at an accelerated rate beyond age 85. Grouping people aged 85+ into one category leads to substantial underestimates of disability in the oldest old. Accurate estimates are necessary for adequate allocation of care and rehabilitation resources for a rapidly expanding age group.
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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it