70ASSOCIATION OF THE CLINICAL FRAILTY SCALE (CFS) WITH HOSPITAL OUTCOMES IN A LARGE RETROSPECTIVE COHORT OF NON-ELECTIVE ADMISSIONS AGED ≥75 PRESENTING TO A TERTIARY UNIVERSITY NHS HOSPITAL:
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The 9-point Clinical Frailty Scale© (CFS) was validated in the Canadian Study of Health and Aging as a predictor of adverse outcomes in community-dwelling older people. The CFS has been less well studied in acute hospital settings. In our centre, the use of the CFS in emergency admissions of people aged ≥75 years was introduced under the Commissioning for Quality and Innovation payment framework. We retrospectively studied the association of the CFS with patient characteristics and outcomes. Methods: Between 01/08/2013 and 31/07/2014, there were 11271 emergency admission episodes of people aged ≥75 years (all specialties), corresponding to 7532 unique patients (first admissions); of those, 5764 had the CFS measured (by admitting team) within 72 hours of admission. The CFS was correlated with the variables in the table. Age-adjusted trend statistics were computed with multivariate linear regression (dichotomous variables) and 2-tailed partial correlation (continuous variables). Conclusions: The CFS was a significant predictor of outcomes of people aged ≥75 years admitted non-electively, and could serve as a practical focus to target specialist geriatric resources within the hospital.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".