A Longitudinal Investigation of Fear of Falling, Fear of Pain, and Activity Avoidance in Community-Dwelling Older Adults
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of this study was to examine the role of fear of falling, fear of pain, and associated activity avoidance in the prediction of pain and falls. METHOD: A 6-month longitudinal study of older community-dwelling adults. RESULTS: The authors found that fear of falling is a better predictor of falls than is activity avoidance. Moreover, fear of pain did not predict future pain-related avoidance or future pain in the sample of seniors. DISCUSSION: The findings confirm the ability of fear of falling to predict falls but challenge preexisting models developed to account for the relationship between falls and fear. The findings also suggest limits on the generalizability of fear-avoidance models of pain. The authors conclude by suggesting mechanisms that could account for the relationship of fears with falls and pain. Unlike previous conceptualizations, these mechanisms do not rely on activity avoidance as an explanation.
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.
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 | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it