MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2960743077 · doi:10.1093/ageing/afz056.02

52DESIGNING A FRAILTY SCREENING TOOLKIT TO TRIAGE PATIENTS SEEN IN TRANSCATHERTER AORTIC VALVE IMPLANTATION (TAVI) CLINIC

2019· article· en· W2960743077 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
G Donnelly, Mamta Buch, Lachlan McDowell, Alexandre Barbosa de Oliveira, Pernilla Darlington, Ash Watson

Bibliographic record

VenueAge and Ageing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTriageCardiologyAortic valveInternal medicineAortic valve stenosisEmergency medicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Frailty is associated with increased mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing a TAVI (Martin, Sperrin, Ludman, BMJ Open, 2018, 1–9). NICE guidance promotes a shared decision-making model when making treatment choices in the frail elderly with symptomatic aortic stenosis, which should involve a Multi-Disciplinary Team including a specialist in elderly medicine (IPG586, 2017). With growing demands on frailty specialists, we need to ensure that we review the appropriate cases so that our time is used effectively. Methods: We created a pro-forma to identify patients who could benefit from geriatrician input. The TAVI ANP’s recorded data during 5 months of clinics. Acceptance criteria for geriatric referral included patients with either a Katz ADL score <4, age over 90, Mini Cog score of 2 or below and moderately or severely frail on Edmonton Frailty Scale (EFS). A Katz ADL score of 4 or less was used to highlight dependency as it is a validated marker of mortality in TAVI patients (Rogers, Alraises, Moussa, Am J Cardiol, 2018, 121, 850–855). The EFS was chosen as a frailty screen as it is validated in acute coronary syndrome and for use by non-geriatricians (Judith, Partridge, Harari, Age and Ageing, 2012, 41, 142–147). Results: 60 patients, 57% male with a median age of 82 (range 65–93). All patients lived in their own home with four requiring carers. 16 patients were highlighted as requiring a referral (7 > 90, 2 EFS moderately frail, 9 Mini Cog <2, 6 Katz ADL <4). The EFS flagged 8 as mildly frail and 14 as vulnerable, with only 7 of these 22 patients captured by the other referral criteria. Conclusion: Using the EFS alone to triage patients is not adequate. We need to continue to screen across the variety of domains including frailty, dependence and cognition, as some patients only triggered referral in one area. We have adapted the pro-forma to include a Clinical Frailty Score alongside the EFS to compare scores and analyse which score should be used in future practice. This project has allowed us to establish the potential demand on a geriatrician involved in a TAVI service. It has allowed us to share our knowledge of frailty with the TAVI team and create a screening tool to help to triage those who would benefit from a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.009

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAge and AgeingSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207