Psychiatric Illness in Relation to Frailty in Community-Dwelling Elderly People without Dementia: A Report from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated whether frailty, defined as the accumulation of multiple, interacting illnesses, impairments and disabilities, is associated with psychiatric illness in older adults. Five-thousand-six-hundred-and-seventy-six community dwellers without dementia were identified within the Canadian Study of Health and Aging, and self-reported psychiatric illness was compared by levels of frailty (defined by an index of deficits that excluded mental illnesses). People with psychiatric illness (12.6% of those surveyed, who chiefly reported depression) had a higher mean frailty index value than those who did not. Older age was not associated with higher odds of psychiatric illness. Taking sex, frailty, and education into account, the odds of psychiatric illness decreased with each increasing year of age (OR 0.95; 95% CI, 0.94-0.97). Frailty was associated with psychiatric illness; for each additional deficit-defining frailty, odds of psychiatric illness increased (OR 1.23; 95% CI, 1.19-1.26). Similarly, psychiatric illness was associated with much higher odds of being among the most frail. These findings lend support to a multidimensional conceptualization of frailty. Our data also suggest that health care professionals who work with older adults with psychiatric illness should expect frailty to be common, and that those working with frail seniors should consider the possible co-existence of depression and psychiatric illness.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".