MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014984081 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000000860

Long-Term Association Between Frailty and Health-Related Quality of Life Among Survivors of Critical Illness

2015· article· en· W2014984081 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sean M. Bagshaw, Henry T. Stelfox, Jeffrey Johnson, Robert C. McDermid, Darryl Rolfson, Ross T. Tsuyuki, Quazi Ibrahim, Sumit R. Majumdar

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta HospitalUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioQuality of life (healthcare)Observational studyOddsLogistic regressionCohort studyProspective cohort studyInternal medicineDepression (economics)Visual analogue scaleSeverity of illnessPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Frailty is a multidimensional syndrome characterized by loss of physiologic reserve that gives rise to vulnerability to poor outcomes. We aimed to examine the association between frailty and long-term health-related quality of life among survivors of critical illness. DESIGN: Prospective multicenter observational cohort study. SETTING: ICUs in six hospitals from across Alberta, Canada. PATIENTS: Four hundred twenty-one critically ill patients who were 50 years or older. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Frailty was operationalized by a score of more than 4 on the Clinical Frailty Scale. Health-related quality of life was measured by the EuroQol Health Questionnaire and Short-Form 12 Physical and Mental Component Scores at 6 and 12 months. Multiple logistic and linear regression with generalized estimating equations was used to explore the association between frailty and health-related quality of life. In total, frailty was diagnosed in 33% (95% CI, 28-38). Frail patients were older, had more comorbidities, and higher illness severity. EuroQol-visual analogue scale scores were lower for frail compared with not frail patients at 6 months (52.2 ± 22.5 vs 64.6 ± 19.4; p < 0.001) and 12 months (54.4 ± 23.1 vs 68.0 ± 17.8; p < 0.001). Frail patients reported greater problems with mobility (71% vs 45%; odds ratio, 3.1 [1.6-6.1]; p = 0.001), self-care (49% vs 15%; odds ratio, 5.8 [2.9-11.7]; p < 0.001), usual activities (80% vs 52%; odds ratio, 3.9 [1.8-8.2]; p < 0.001), pain/discomfort (68% vs 47%; odds ratio, 2.0 [1.1-3.8]; p = 0.03), and anxiety/depression (51% vs 27%; odds ratio, 2.8 [1.5-5.3]; p = 0.001) compared with not frail patients. Frail patients described lower health-related quality of life on both physical component score (34.7 ± 7.8 vs 37.8 ± 6.7; p = 0.012) and mental component score (33.8 ± 7.0 vs 38.6 ± 7.7; p < 0.001) at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Frail survivors of critical illness experienced greater impairment in health-related quality of life, functional dependence, and disability compared with those not frail. The systematic assessment of frailty may assist in better informing patients and families on the complexities of survivorship and recovery.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations267
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207