MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141573521 · doi:10.1093/gerona/57.9.m569

Predictors of Functional Decline in Hospitalized Elderly Patients: A Systematic Review

2002· review· en· W2141573521 on OpenAlexafffund
Jane McCusker, Ritsuko Kakuma, Michał Abrahamowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journals of Gerontology Series A · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversitySt Mary's Hospital CentreMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMcGill University
KeywordsDeliriumMedicineGerontologyResidenceCognitive declineActivities of daily livingCognitionDementiaDemographyPhysical therapyIntensive care medicineInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This article will systematically review the methodological characteristics and results of studies of variables and indices that predict functional decline in older hospitalized patients. METHODS: We restricted this review to original longitudinal studies of predictors of either physical functional decline or nursing home admission among patients aged 60 and older. Two reviewers independently abstracted information on methodological characteristics and substantive results. RESULTS: Thirty articles were identified, derived from 27 different studies, reporting on 33 substudies. Substantial variability was found with respect to study design, outcomes measured, period of follow-up, predictors investigated, and analytic methods. Multivariable predictive indices were significantly associated with adverse outcomes in the majority of studies that investigated them, as were the following variables: age, diagnosis, activities of daily living, cognitive impairment (including delirium), and residence. CONCLUSIONS: The methodological heterogeneity of the studies identified limits quantitative synthesis of the results. Predictive indices for hospitalized elders appear to have moderate short-term predictive ability.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.004
Bibliometrics0.0100.011
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations272
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journals of Gerontology Series ASame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207