MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081636982 · doi:10.1002/art.11383

Correlates of falls and fear of falling among adults with rheumatoid arthritis

2003· article· en· W2081636982 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marian Jamison, Geri Neuberger, Peggy A. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Nursing Research
KeywordsFear of fallingFalling (accident)MoodPhysical therapyRheumatoid arthritisMedicinePsychologyPoison controlInjury preventionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychiatryInternal medicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To identify correlates of falling and fear of falling, and to examine how fear of falling affects activities among adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Adults (mean age 54.2 years; SD 9.1) with RA (n = 128) responded to questions related to falls, fear of falling, and activities modified. Other measures included the Profile of Mood States Short Form, the McGill Pain Questionnaire Short Form, walk time, grip strength, predicted maximum oxygen uptake, and joint count. RESULTS: Thirty-five percent of participants fell during the previous year. Subjects who fell had more comorbid conditions than subjects who did not fall. Almost 60% were fearful of falling. Compared with subjects who denied fear of falling, fearful subjects had longer walk times, more comorbid conditions, and more intense pain. Activities affected most by fear of falling involved heavy work and climbing. CONCLUSIONS: The number of comorbid conditions plays an important role in falling and fear of falling in adults with RA. Knowledge of this and other factors, such as pain intensity and functional status, can facilitate appropriate interventions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 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

Citations111
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis Care & ResearchSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207