MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Preoperative frailty assessment with Robinson Frailty Score (RFS) and Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS) in older surgical patients with cancer.

2020· article· en· W3031713048 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tomohiro F. Nishijima, Taito Esaki, Masaru Morita, Yasushi Toh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePolypharmacyGeriatric oncologyActivities of daily livingMoodCohortAdverse effectComorbiditySarcopeniaGeriatricsInternal medicineQuality of life (healthcare)CancerPhysical therapyGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e24033 Background: In general geriatric surgical patients, frailty has been shown to predict higher rates of postoperative adverse outcomes. A little is known about how to optimally assess older adults with cancer for preoperative frailty. We evaluated the potential utility of the RFS [Robinson Am J Surg. 2013], EFS [Rolfson Age Ageing. 2006] and Geriatric 8 (G8) for prediction of postoperative adverse events. Methods: This cohort study included older adults who were prospectively evaluated by geriatric oncology service at Kyushu Cancer Center in Japan before undergoing oncological surgery between September 2018 and December 2019. The RFS measures cognition, function (activities of daily living (ADLs) and Timed Up & GO (TUG)), history of falls, comorbidity, albumin and hematocrit (score 0 to 1: fit (n = 71), 2 to 3: prefrail (n = 30) and 4 to 7: frail (n = 13)). The EFS evaluates cognition, function (IADLs and TUG), incontinence, self-perceived health, mood, nutrition, polypharmacy and social support (score 0 to 3: fit, 4 to 7: prefrail and 8 to 17: frail). G8 was dichotomized at previously studied cut-off value of 14. The primary outcome was composite adverse events (AEs), including 30-day postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 2) and discharge to an institutional care facility. Severity of surgery was assessed using the Operative Stress Score (OSS) [Shinall JAMA Surg. 2019]. Results: Of 114 patients (median age 80 years, range 72-96), surgery type was GI in 62%, HEENT in 20%, GYN in 8%, and other in 10%. 100 patients had ECOG PS 0 to 1. Using the OSS, surgical procedures were classified as very low to low stress (9%), moderate stress (31%), high stress (46%) and very high stress (15%). 45 patients had AEs. After adjusting for the OSS, preoperative frailty based on the RFS was associated with the occurrence of AEs (fit: 25%, prefrail: 49%, frail: 77%; p < 0.01). However, neither the EFS (fit: 30%, prefrail: 37%, frail: 60%; p = 0.14) nor G8 was significantly associated with a risk of AEs (score > 14: 17%, score ≤ 14: 41%; p = 0.07). Conclusions: Preoperative frailty status defined by the RFS is predictive of postoperative adverse outcomes in older adults undergoing elective surgery for cancer.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.346 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→