Determination of Prefracture Physical Function in Community-Dwelling People Who Fracture Their Hip
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prefracture physical function must be accurately determined to set appropriate and attainable goals for rehabilitation following hip fracture. This is especially important for people who were living independently prior to their fracture. This study determines reliability and internal consistency of a prefracture physical function questionnaire (PFPFQ) completed by both patients and knowledgeable informants (KIs). METHODS: A 20-item PFPFQ, including ambulation, transfers, balance, and self-care domains, was developed using focus groups. Community-dwelling patients with a hip fracture (N = 40, 77.9 +/- 8 years) completed the PFPFQ on two occasions during postoperative acute care. Forty KIs were identified by the patients and also completed the PFPFQ on two occasions via telephone interview. Day-to-day reliability of the patients and KIs [intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC)], and internal consistency [Kuder-Richardson coefficient (KR)] of the PFPFQ were determined. RESULTS: Intrarater reliability was high with ICCs (95% confidence interval) of 0.94 (0.89, 0.96) for patients and 0.96 (0.93, 0.98) for KIs. Interrater reliability on occasion 1 had an ICC of 0.81 (0.69, 0.88). Internal consistency of the patient responses on the first occasion was high (KR coefficient = 0.896). CONCLUSIONS: The PFPFQ is a reliable and internally consistent instrument for determining prefracture physical function in community-dwelling people who fracture their hip. In situations where patients with a hip fracture are unable to provide this necessary information, KIs can provide reliable estimates of prefracture function to assist in setting appropriate rehabilitation goals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".