MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059606549 · doi:10.4997/jrcpe.2012.412

Frailty and its quantitative clinical evaluation

2012· article· en· W2059606549 on OpenAlexaff
Paige Moorhouse, K. Rockwood

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsCapital District Health AuthorityQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstitutionalisationVulnerability (computing)MedicineGerontologySocial isolationDiseaseHealth careIsolation (microbiology)PsychiatryBioinformaticsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Frailty is a progressive physiological decline in multiple organ systems marked by loss of function, loss of physiological reserve and increased vulnerability to disease and death. Frail older adults are vulnerable to poor health outcomes including an increased risk of disability, social isolation and institutionalisation. With the advances in understanding of the physiological underpinnings and clinical measurement of frailty over the past decade, opportunities both to streamline and quantify the clinical measurement and care planning associated with frailty have emerged. Such tools allow clinicians to recognise and quantify frailty in order to understand a patient's vulnerability to poor health outcomes in a way that chronological age does not provide. Clinical research into outcomes associated with frailty in specific settings is ongoing and will be instrumental to the provision of appropriate care of older adults in the future.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations178
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of EdinburghSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207