MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2469071806 · doi:10.2196/ijmr.5590

Relationship Between Difficulties in Daily Activities and Falling: Loco-Check as a Self-Assessment of Fall Risk

2016· article· en· W2469071806 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Journal of Medical Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFalling (accident)ChecklistGerontologyService (business)MedicineTest (biology)Older peopleElderly peoplePopulationPhysical therapyPsychologyEnvironmental healthBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: People aged 65 years or older accounted for 25.1% of the Japanese population in 2013, and this characterizes the country as a "super-aging society." With increased aging, fall-related injuries are becoming important in Japan, because such injuries underlie the necessity for nursing care services. If people could evaluate their risk of falling using a simple self-check test, they would be able to take preventive measures such as exercise, muscle training, walking with a cane, or renovation of their surroundings to remove impediments. Loco-check is a checklist measure of early locomotive syndrome (circumstances in which elderly people need nursing care service or are at high risk of requiring the service within a short time), prepared by the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) in 2007, but it is unclear if there is any association between this measure and falls. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between falls during the previous year and the 7 "loco-check" daily activity items and the total number of items endorsed, and sleep duration. METHODS: We conducted an Internet panel survey. Subjects were 624 persons aged between 30 and 90 years. The general health condition of the participants, including their experience of falling, daily activities, and sleep duration, was investigated. A multivariate analysis was carried out using logistic regression to investigate the relationship between falls in the previous year and difficulties with specific daily activities and total number of difficulties (loco-check) endorsed, and sleep duration, adjusting for sex and age. RESULTS: One-fourth of participants (157 persons) experienced at least one fall during the previous year. Fall rate of females (94/312: 30.1%) was significantly higher than that of males (63/312: 20.2%). Fall rate of persons aged more than 65 years (80/242: 33.1%) was significantly higher than that of younger persons (77/382: 20.2%). Logistic regression analysis revealed that daily activities such as "impossibility of getting across the road at a crossing before the traffic light changes" are significantly related to falling. Logistic regression analysis also demonstrated a relationship between the number of items endorsed on loco-check and incidence of falling, wherein persons who endorsed 4 or more items appear to be at higher risk for falls. However, logistic regression found no significant relationship between sleep duration and falling. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated a relationship between the number of loco-check items endorsed and the incidence of falling in the previous year. Endorsement of 4 or more items appeared to signal a high risk for falls. The short self-administered checklist can be a valuable tool for assessing the risk of falling and for initiating preventive measures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.418 · 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