Cross-cultural adaptation and validity of the "Edmonton Frail Scale - EFS" in a Brazilian elderly sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the cross-cultural adaptation of the Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS) and its validity in a Brazilian elderly sample. Translation and back-translation were performed, as well as discussion with professionals and elderly for conceptual equivalence, semantic validation and pre-test of the scale. The scale was applied to 137 elderly aged 65 years or older who lived in the community. In the know-groups validation of the frailty diagnosis between gender, age and cognitive deficit, elder elderly, female and with a cognitive deficit scored higher on the frailty diagnosis. A negative convergent correlation was found between the EFS and the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) (-0.53, p< 0.01) and the total score of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) (-0.60, p< 0.01). The watch test presented high sensitivity and low specificity levels. The Portuguese version of the EFS was considered valid in the study sample.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".