Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine if a risk score developed in hospitalised older adults in the UK in 1962 is correlated with other measures of health and if this risk score predicts death or institutionalisation in community-living older adults. METHODS: A total of 1,735 older adults residing in the community in 1991 were followed over five years. We replicated the original risk index, a composite score of cognitive status, disability and continence. Other measures included age, gender, education, self-rated health (SRH), life satisfaction (LS) and frailty. Death and nursing home (NH) admission were determined five years later. RESULTS: The risk score was strongly associated with frailty, SRH and LS. The index predicted mortality and NH use: The adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval) from multinomial logistic regression models was 0.74 (0.69, 0.79) for death and 0.74 (0.67, 0.83) for NH. CONCLUSIONS: A risk score devised to measure inpatient rehabilitation also predicts outcomes in community-dwelling older adults. Cognition and function predict a variety of adverse outcomes in a variety of settings in different historic eras.
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 | 0.003 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".