Preditores ambientais para quedas em idosos: revisão integrativa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objetivo: Identificar na literatura os preditores ambientais de quedas em idosos. Metodologia: revisão integrativa da literatura incluiu-se investigações desenvolvidas que abordassem quedas no ambiente do idosos sem recorte temporal. Excluiu-se as revisões, estudos sem análises especificas para quedas no ambiente, e estudos com população de idosos em situações especiais. Consultou-se as bases de dados Lilacs, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science e portal PubMed, utilizando o descritor acidentes por quedas, seus correspondentes em português e o operador boleano AND. Para avaliar a qualidade dos estudos utilizou a escala de Newcastle-Ottawa. Após a aplicação dos critérios de inclusão e exclusão, foram selecionados 12 artigos. Resultados: Localizaram-se 07 estudos sendo: três estudos transversais e quatro coortes. O tamanho das amostras variou de 18 a 1.243 idosos e ano de publicação de 1998 a 2017, sendo os mais recentes 2013, 2015 e 2017. Os estudos abordaram equilíbrio e marcha, quedas autorreferidas e prevalência de riscos ambientais em sua maioria. Conclusão: Evidenciou-se que os multifatores individuais e do ambiente predispõem aos indivíduos idosos às quedas.
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 | 0.016 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.019 | 0.022 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".