MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755247289 · doi:10.1111/1747-0080.12385

High nutrition risk is associated with higher risk of dysphagia in advanced age adults newly admitted to hospital

2017· article· en· W2755247289 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amy Popman, Marilize Richter, Jacqueline Allen, Carol Wham

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition & Dietetics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDysphagiaMedicineMalnutritionBody mass indexGrip strengthPhysical therapyCross-sectional studyRisk assessmentInternal medicinePediatricsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To establish the prevalence of nutrition risk and associated risk factors among adults of advanced age newly admitted to hospital. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was undertaken in adults aged over 85 years admitted to one of two hospital wards in Auckland within the previous 5 days. An interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to establish participant's socio-demographic and health characteristics. Markers of body composition and muscle strength were collected. Nutrition risk was assessed using the Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (MNA-SF), dysphagia risk using the 10-Item Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) and level of cognition using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. RESULTS: A total of 88 participants with a mean age of 90.0 ± 3.7 years completed the assessments. A third (28.4%) of the participants were categorised by the MNA-SF as malnourished and 43.2% were classified at risk of malnutrition. A third (29.5%) were at risk of dysphagia as assessed by EAT-10. Malnourished participants were more likely to be at risk of dysphagia (P = 0.015). The MNA-SF score was positively correlated with body mass index (r = 0.484, P < 0.001) and grip strength (r = 0.250, P = 0.026) and negatively correlated with risk of dysphagia (r = -0.383, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among newly hospitalised adults of advanced age, over two thirds were malnourished or at risk of malnutrition, and a third were at risk of dysphagia. Nutrition risk was positively correlated with low BMI and grip strength and negatively correlated with dysphagia risk. Findings highlight the importance of screening for dysphagia risk, especially in those identified to be malnourished or at nutrition risk.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrition & DieteticsSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207