MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124650440 · doi:10.1093/ageing/afu038.6

81 * GAIT VELOCITY IN A COGNITIVELY IMPAIRED POPULATION DURING AN ACUTE HOSPITAL ADMISSION

2014· article· en· W2124650440 on OpenAlexaff
S. Ritchie, Harvey R. Smith, Romaine P. Mackie, J. Jones, Gareth Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueAge and Ageing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCognitionMann–Whitney U testCognitive impairmentGaitPopulationPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Gait velocity (Gvel) is predictive of survival in adults, reflective of health and functional status and assists treatment planning for clinicians (Studenski et al, 2011 JAMA). Gvel has been shown to improve during short inpatient episodes (Braden et al 2012 JGPT) however research designs often exclude patients with cognitive impairment (CI). Our aims were to determine whether Gvel measurement is feasible in patients with CI admitted acutely to an OPU and to identify differences in GVel between patients with and without CI. Method: We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients (n = 103) admitted to our 84 bedded unit between July and August 2012. Specifically we captured episode cognitive status, length of stay (LOS) and 6m GVel (admission and discharge). Cut-offs of cognitive measures enabled division of our sample into those with and without CI. Results: Complete data was captured for 63 (61%) patients (Table 1). 49,(78%) patients were interpreted to be experiencing CI. Clinicians reported no meaningful time difference or adverse incidents when measuring Gvel in cognitively impaired individuals. There were no significant differences between groups in Gvel performances or change, nor in age, LOS or acuity (Table 2). Mean Gvel increased significantly within groups between admission and discharge (Table 3) although of doubtful clinical meaning (<0.1m.sec−1). Mean Gvel at discharge remained consistently slow (≤0.4m.sec−1). General Characteristics Values: mean (SD) unless otherwise stated Comparisons between groups *2 tailed Mann-Whitney U Test Comparison within groups * 2 tailed paired t-test. Conclusions: It was feasible to measure GVel using existing protocols with CI patients. Our patients are discharged with velocities slower than 0.6m.sec−1 which is considered abnormally slow and is associated with declines in functional independence. This has implications for rehabilitation in the community. Literature suggests a meaningful change in GVel of 0.1m.sec−1, which was not achieved in either group. However velocity improvements were higher in the non-impaired group. This might have implications for more tailored physical therapy for patients with CI and warrants further study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.610
Threshold uncertainty score0.373

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAge and AgeingSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207