MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040413826 · doi:10.1017/s0959259802012236

Some mathematical models of frailty and their clinical implications

2002· article· en· W2040413826 on OpenAlexaff
Kenneth Rockwood, Arnold B. Mitnitski, Chris MacKnight

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews in Clinical Gerontology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGerontologyTerm (time)MedicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Frailty is a term that is used often, but commonly not defined precisely. As reviewed elsewhere most definitions share several features. Typically, older adults who are frail have a greater rate of dependence on others, so-called ‘loss of physiological reserve’ and multiple diseases. A dynamic component is often included (e.g. ‘loss of reserve’ and such synonyms as ‘unstable disability’ and ‘impaired homeostenosis’) and is manifest when, over time, patients respond less well to stress, or when those with given levels of frailty have higher rates of adverse outcomes. Still, the imprecision of the term frailty has led some to question its merit, and either to develop alternative means of classification or to stay with the concept of function and disability. Alternative methods of classification are either broadly or narrowly focussed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.449
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.039 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations142
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReviews in Clinical GerontologySame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207