Preventing the occurrence of pressure ulceration in hospitalised elderly patients
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
OBJECTIVE: To determine which factors contribute to the development of pressure ulcers and to evaluate the role of topical agents in preventing their occurrence. METHOD: An observational, prospective survey covered 36 care of the elderly wards and involved 1121 patients at high or very high risk of pressure ulceration. The patients, of whom 667 (59.6%) received a gentle application of a topical agent to at-risk areas, were followed up for eight weeks. RESULTS: Of the patients, 15.7% developed a pressure ulcer. The use of a corpitolinol 60-based topical agent (Sanyrène/Corpitol) significantly reduced the incidence of pelvic pressure ulcers (p=0.04) when used with recognised prevention strategies. This was identified by undertaking a logistic regression analysis. The resulting odds ratio of 0.61 indicates that the intervention helped to reduce the number of pressure ulcers by 40%. CONCLUSION: The results of this observational study can provide a useful guide to the design of further randomised controlled trials.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it