MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fragilidade, perfil e cognição de idosos residentes em área de alta vulnerabilidade social

2019· article· pt· W2964754446 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

VenueCiência & Saúde Coletiva · 2019
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsGerontologyMedicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to associate frailty with sociodemographic profile and cognition of elderly people living in highly socially vulnerable contexts registered at a Social Assistance Referral Centers in a city of inland São Paulo. This is a cross-sectional and quantitative study with 48 elderly. Data was collected with a sociodemographic interview, the Edmonton Frail Scale and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and was analyzed with the Jonckheere-Terpstra test, Spearman's correlation and logistic regression (α = 5.0%). This study was approved under Opinion Nº 72182. Of the 48 elderly interviewed, 33.4% were non-frail, 20.8% were apparently vulnerable and 45.8% were frail at some level (mild, moderate or severe). Women (OR = 4.64) and nonwhites (OR = 3.99) were more likely of being frail. The realms with the greatest influence in the determination of frailty were cognition, independence and functional performance, general health and mood, although gender (p = 0.0373) and ethnicity (p = 0.0284) had a significant association. Worth highlighting is that considering the frailty profile of the elderly warrants the development of specific care strategies for this segment of the population in a vulnerable area, preventing futures complications.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.355
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.007

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.265 · 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