Ageing Challenges the Results of any Outcome Study: How to Address the Effects of Ageing on Activities of Daily Living
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Clinical study results might be substantially biased by the effects of ageing, resulting in considerable underestimation of treatment efficacy, especially when assessing activities of daily living (ADL) in elderly people. This study aimed to define age- and comorbidity-related normative values in ADL. METHODS: In cross-sectional sampling, 23 763 German-speaking Swiss individuals were contacted. Valid questionnaires from 16 191 (68%) eligible individuals ≥ 18 years of age were included in the study. Age-related ADL reference values were calculated using questionnaire data. RESULTS: The sample was representative of the German-speaking Swiss population as determined by 2003 census data. Age- and pain-related ADL reference values were plotted and confirmed that disability increased with increasing age. CONCLUSIONS: The use of ADL scales that provide age- and comorbidity-related reference values for outcome studies or studies focusing on the elderly is recommended in order to reduce the effect of bias.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.628 | 0.804 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".