Prevalência e fatores associados à fragilidade em população idosa do Sul do Brasil, 2014*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: to analyze frailty prevalence and associated factors in the elderly in the city of Pelotas, RS, Brazil, in 2014. METHODS: this was a cross-sectional, population-based study of a sample of individuals aged 60 years old or older; a modified version of the Edmonton Frail Scale was used to assess frailty; prevalence ratios (PR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were estimated using Poisson regression. RESULTS: frailty prevalence was 13.8% and was higher among individuals aged 75 years or older (PR 4.33 - 95%CI 2.94;6.39), those of the female gender (PR 1.46 - 95%CI 1.06;2.03) and those living without a partner (PR 1.54 - 95%CI 1.16;2.04); epilepsy (PR 3.58 - 95%CI 2.19;5.85), ischemia (PR 2.56 - 95%CI 2.00;3.28), and heart failure (PR 2.48 - 95%CI 1.92;3.19) were the morbidities most highly associated with frailty. CONCLUSION: frailty was associated with older individuals, the female gender, those living without a partner and those affected by multiple morbidities.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".