A TRANSLATIONAL MODEL TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF POLYPHARMACY ON ADVERSE GERIATRIC OUTCOMES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We developed a translational model to evaluate whether polypharmacy (use of ≥5 different medicines) causes adverse geriatric outcomes and whether these are reversible with deprescribing (withdrawal of medicines). Old (23–24 months) male C57BL/6 mice received control diet (no drugs) for eleven weeks, or diet containing therapeutic doses of five commonly used drugs (simvastatin, metoprolol, omeprazole, paracetamol, citalopram) for four weeks, which were gradually withdrawn over the next six weeks. Physical performance was assessed at baseline, four and eleven weeks and transformed into Frailty Intervention Assessment Values (FIAV): sum of standardised values for locomotor activity, rotarod performance and front paw hang. After four weeks, FIAV was unchanged in controls and declined with polypharmacy (p<0.05). At week eleven FIAV remained unchanged in controls and improved but did not return to baseline in the polypharmacy/deprescribing group. This model can assess the effects of polypharmacy on geriatric outcomes and provides opportunities to investigate mechanisms.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".