MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889017266 · doi:10.1093/gerona/gly205

Multimorbidity Patterns, Frailty, and Survival in Community-Dwelling Older Adults

2018· article· en· W2889017266 on OpenAlex
Quôc Dinh Nguyên, Chenkai Wu, Michelle C. Odden, Dae Hyun Kim

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journals of Gerontology Series A · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsGerontologyEnvironmental healthPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Frailty and multimorbidity are independent prognostic factors for mortality, but their interaction has not been fully explored. We investigated the importance of multimorbidity patterns in older adults with the same level of frailty phenotype. METHODS: In a cohort of 7,197 community-dwelling adults aged 65 years and older, physical frailty status (robust, pre-frail, frail) was defined using shrinking, exhaustion, inactivity, slowness, and weakness. Latent class analysis was used to identify individuals with multimorbidity patterns based on 10 self-reported chronic conditions. We estimated hazard ratios (HR) and incidence rate differences (IRDs) for mortality comparing multimorbidity patterns within each frailty state. RESULTS: Five multimorbidity classes were identified: minimal disease (24.7%), cardiovascular disease (29.0%), osteoarticular disease (27.3%), neuropsychiatric disease (8.9%), and high multisystem morbidity (10.0%). Within each frailty state, the mortality rate per 1,000 person-years over 4 years was greatest in the neuropsychiatric class and lowest in the minimal disease class: robust (56.3 vs 15.7; HR, 2.11 [95% CI: 1.05, 4.21]; IRD, 24.1 [95% CI: -11.2, 59.3]), pre-frail (85.3 vs 40.4; HR, 1.74 [95% CI: 1.28, 2.37]; IRD, 27.1 [95% CI: 7.6, 46.7]), and frail (218.1 vs 96.4; HR, 2.05 [95% CI: 1.36, 3.10]; IRD, 108.4 [95% CI: 65.0, 151.9]). Although HRs did not vary widely by frailty, the excess number of deaths, as reflected by IRDs, increased with greater frailty level. CONCLUSIONS: Considering both multimorbidity patterns and frailty is important for identifying older adults at greater risk of mortality. Of the five patterns identified, the neuropsychiatric class was associated with lower survival across all frailty levels.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.273 · 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