MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998875282 · doi:10.5935/1676-4285.20144980

Evaluation of fragility and nursing interventions in the case of the elderly: a transversal study

2014· article· en· W1998875282 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Graciela Maria Carneiro Maciel, Rejane Maria Paiva de Menezes, Thaís Moreira dos Santos, Heloiza Talita Adriano da Silva, Maria Edjailma Silva Sousa, Gleyce Any Freire de Lima

Bibliographic record

VenueOnline Brazilian Journal of Nursing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFragilityPsychological interventionVulnerability (computing)AutonomyNursing Interventions ClassificationMedicineGerontological nursingScale (ratio)GerontologyNursingPsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Fragility is a multidimensional syndrome that involves biological, psychological and social factors. The risk to fragility in the elderly is associated with the state of vulnerability of these people leading to the development of incapacitating conditions, loss of autonomy, and functional dependency. Aims: To evaluate and ascertain the nursing interventions for the elderly at risk of fragility; to identify the level of such patients by using Edmonton’s Frail Scale; to verify the association of the domains described in the Scale with the levels of fragility; to indicate the nursing interventions for the elderly at risk of fragility according to the Protocol of Interventions. Method: This is a transversal study, which adopts a quantitative approach. Expected results: The indication of nursing interventions for the elderly at risk of fragility. Implications to health: This present study will be a positive addition to gerontology clinical practice, in terms of avoiding or reducing the effect of fragility.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.337 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOnline Brazilian Journal of NursingSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207