Basic ADL Disability and Functional Limitation Rates Among Older Americans From 2000-2005: The End of the Decline?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study sought to determine whether the rates of basic activities of daily living (ADL) disabilities and functional limitations declined, remained the same, or increased between 2000 and 2005 when (a) only community-dwelling Americans aged 65 and older were examined and (b) when institutionalized older adults were included. METHOD: Using data from the American Community Survey and the National Nursing Home Survey, we calculated annual prevalence rates of basic ADL disabilities and functional limitations and fitted regression lines to examine trends over time. RESULTS: The rates of basic ADL disabilities among community-dwelling adults aged 65 and older increased 9% between 2000 and 2005. When institutionalized elders were included, basic ADL disability rates were stable among men but increased among women. Functional limitation rates did not significantly change between 2000 and 2005. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest an end of the decline in disability rates among older Americans, which, if confirmed, could have important implications for health care.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it