Cognitive Status at Hospital Admission: Postoperative Trajectory of Functional Recovery for Hip Fracture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment is common in the hip fracture patient population, yet few studies of functional recovery include this subgroup. The objective was to determine whether baseline cognition was a determinant of the rate of functional recovery over 6 months after hip fracture. METHODS: A consecutive cohort of 383 patients 65 years or older who were treated for hip fracture within a Canadian health region were grouped on cognitive status. Participants with Mini-Mental Status Examination scores <18 at 3-5 days postoperatively were classified as cognitively impaired. Primary outcome was the Functional Independence Measure. Interviews were completed within 5 days postoperatively (baseline), 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. Linear mixed modeling examined the pattern of recovery and the effect of cognitive status. RESULTS: Of the 383 participants, 104 (27%) had Mini-Mental Status Examination scores of less than 18. The effect size for changes in the FIM over 6 months was large for those without cognitive impairment (effect size = 2.3) and smaller for those with cognitive impairment (effect size = 0.9). After adjusting for age, gender, proxy respondent, and fracture type, participants with impaired cognition recovered more slowly, never attaining comparable levels with those without cognitive impairment. The 6-month health status for the cohort was substantially lower than the health status of age-gender-matched, community-dwelling adults. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cognitive impairment who fracture their hips recover more slowly and achieve less functional recovery. Recovery is not uniform nor is it linear over the initial 6 months. The diversity of patient needs should be recognized postoperatively so that long-term recovery is optimized.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".