Long-Term Care Residents’ Geriatric Syndromes at Admission and Disablement Over Time: An Observational Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Disablement occurs when people lose their ability to perform activities of daily living (ADLs) like bathing and dressing, and is measured as the rate of increasing disability over time. We examined whether balance impairment, cognitive impairment, or pain among residents at admission to long-term care homes were predictive of their rate of disablement over the subsequent 2 years. METHODS: Linked administrative databases were used to conduct a longitudinal cohort study of 12,334 residents admitted to 633 long-term care (LTC) homes between April 1, 2011 and March 31, 2012, in Ontario, Canada. Residents received an admission assessment of disability upon admission to LTC using the RAI-MDS 2.0 ADL long-form score (ADL LFS, range 0-28) and at least two subsequent disability assessments. Multivariable regression models estimated the adjusted association between balance impairment, cognitive impairment, and pain present at admission and residents' subsequent disablement over 2 years. RESULTS: This population sample of newly admitted Ontario long-term care residents had a median disability score of 13 (interquartile range [IQR] = 7, 19) at admission. Greater balance impairment and cognitive impairment at admission were significantly associated with faster resident disablement over 2 years in adjusted models, while daily pain was not. CONCLUSIONS: Balance impairment and cognitive impairment among newly admitted long-term care home residents are associated with increased rate of disablement over the following 2 years. Further research should examine the mechanisms driving this association and identify whether they are amenable to intervention.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".