Serum Zinc and Copper Status in Hospitalized vs. Healthy Elderly Subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess serum zinc and copper concentrations of elderly hospitalized patients with a broad range of diseases and compare their levels to those of healthy community dwelling controls of similar age. METHODS: This case-control study compared serum zinc and copper levels of 668 hospitalized subjects, aged 70 or over, with 104 healthy controls of the same age and from the same geographical area. The study protocol, conducted by one physician on the day after the admission to the hospital, included a questionnaire on sociodemographic characteristics, a medical examination, and serum zinc and copper measured with flame atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Data were analysed using analysis of covariance, controlling for age and sex. RESULTS: The diseased subjects had markedly lower zinc concentrations than the control group. The frequency of low values (<0.70 mg/L) was high (20.2% vs. zero in controls, p < 0.001), and it differed among various disease categories: 35.7% for respiratory disease, 20%- 27% for cancer, infectious disease, trauma, blood diseases, and genitourinary diseases, and less than 20% for the other diseases. Low values for serum copper concentration (<0.80 mg/L) were rare in hospitalized subjects (1.4% vs. zero in controls). Whatever the disease category and number of diagnoses considered, the serum copper/zinc ratio was significantly (p < 0.001) higher in diseased than in healthy people. CONCLUSIONS: Elderly hospitalized patients are at elevated risk of low zinc but not copper values. The significantly lower values of serum zinc found in the hospitalized elderly compared to healthy elderly are likely to be related to disease rather than to aging per se. In addition to other classic anthropometric (BMI) and biological (serum proteins) nutritional parameters, copper/zinc ratio may be a useful marker of malnutrition.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".