MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906042359 · doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2018.11.003

Orthostatic Hypotension and Falls in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2018· review· en· W2906042359 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueJournal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekRadboud UniversiteitEuropean Commission
KeywordsOrthostatic vital signsMedicineOdds ratioMeta-analysisConfidence intervalPopulationPhysical therapyBlood pressureInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Orthostatic hypotension is a potential risk factor for falls in older adults, but existing evidence on this relationship is inconclusive. This study addresses the association between orthostatic hypotension and falls. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the cross-sectional and longitudinal studies assessing the association between orthostatic hypotension and falls, as preregistered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42017060134). SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A literature search was performed on February 20, 2017, in MEDLINE (from 1946), PubMed (from 1966), and EMBASE (from 1947) using the terms orthostatic hypotension, postural hypotension, and falls. References of included studies were screened for other eligible studies. Study selection was performed independently by 2 reviewers using the following inclusion criteria: published in English; mean/median age of the population ≥65 years; blood pressure measurement before and after postural change; and assessment of the association of orthostatic hypotension with falls. The following studies were excluded: conference abstracts, case reports, reviews, and editorials. Data extraction was performed independently by 2 reviewers. MEASURES: Unadjusted odds ratios of the association between orthostatic hypotension and falls were used for pooling using a random effects model. Studies were rated as high, moderate, or low quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Out of 5646 studies, 63 studies (51,800 individuals) were included in the systematic review and 50 studies (49,164 individuals) in the meta-analysis. Out of 63 studies, 39 were cross-sectional and 24 were longitudinal. Orthostatic hypotension was positively associated with falls (odds ratio 1.73, 95% confidence interval 1.50-1.99). The result was independent of study population, study design, study quality, orthostatic hypotension definition, and blood pressure measurement method. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Orthostatic hypotension is significantly positively associated with falls in older adults, underpinning the clinical relevance to test for an orthostatic blood pressure drop and highlighting the need to investigate orthostatic hypotension treatment to potentially reduce falls.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.539
Threshold uncertainty score0.899

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.309
Teacher spread0.293 · 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