MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112763646 · doi:10.1093/gerona/60.7.862

Do Centenarians Die Healthy? An Autopsy Study

2005· article· en· W2112763646 on OpenAlexaff
Andrea Berzlanovich, W. Keil, Thomas Waldhoer, E. Sim, Peter Fasching, Barbara Fazeny-Dörner

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journals of Gerontology Series A · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutopsy Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutopsyMedicineCause of deathComorbidityDiseasePopulationPediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Our goal was to assess the prevalence of common causes of death and the demographic variables in a selected population of centenarians. METHODS: The autopsy reports and medical histories of all individuals > or =100 years, dying unexpectedly out of hospital, were gathered from 42,398 consecutive autopsies, performed over a period of 18 years at the Institute of Forensic Medicine, Vienna. These records were evaluated with regard to age and sex, circumstances of death, season, time and the cause of death, as well as the presence of any other comorbidity. RESULTS: Forty centenarians (11 men, 29 women) were identified with a median age of 102 +/- 2.0 (range: 100-108) years. Sixty percent were described as having been healthy before death. However, an acute organic failure causing death was found in 100%, including cardiovascular diseases in 68%, respiratory illnesses in 25%, gastrointestinal disorders in 5%, and cerebrovascular disease in 2%. Additionally, centenarians suffered from several comorbidities (cardiac antecedents, neurologic disorders, liver diseases, cholecystolithiasis), which were not judged to be the cause of death. CONCLUSIONS: Centenarians, though perceived to have been healthy just prior to death, succumbed to diseases in 100% of the cases examined. They did not die merely "of old age." The 100% post mortem diagnosis of death as a result of acute organic failure justifies autopsy as a legal requirement for this clinically difficult age group.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations61
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journals of Gerontology Series ASame topicAutopsy Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207