MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084404624 · doi:10.1155/2012/353252

The de Morton Mobility Index: Normative Data for a Clinically Useful Mobility Instrument

2012· article· en· W2084404624 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Erin M. Macri, Jessica Anne Lewis, Karim M. Khan, Maureen C. Ashe, Natalie A. de Morton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aging Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNormativePopulationAlgorithmGerontologyMachine learningMedicineArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceDemographySociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determining mobility status is an important component of any health assessment for older adults. In order for a mobility measure to be relevant and meaningful, normative data are required for comparison to a healthy reference population. The DEMMI is the first mobility instrument to measure mobility across the spectrum from bed bound to functional levels of independent mobility. In this cross-sectional observational study, normative data were obtained for the DEMMI from a population of 183 healthy, community-dwelling adults age 60+ who resided in Vancouver, Canada and Melbourne, Australia. Older age categories had significantly lower DEMMI mobility mean scores (P < 0.05), as did individuals who walked with a mobility aid or lived in semi-independent living (assisted living or retirement village), whereas DEMMI scores did not differ by sex (P = 0.49) or reported falls history (P = 0.21). Normative data for the DEMMI mobility instrument provides vital reference scores to facilitate its use across the mobility spectrum in clinical, research, and policymaking settings.

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)0.006
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.261
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations45
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aging ResearchSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207