Multimorbidity, ageing and mortality: normative data and cohort study in an American population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe the percentile distribution of multimorbidity across age by sex, race and ethnicity, and to demonstrate the utility of multimorbidity percentiles to predict mortality. DESIGN: Population-based descriptive study and cohort study. SETTING: Olmsted County, Minnesota (USA). PARTICIPANTS: We used the medical records-linkage system of the Rochester Epidemiology Project (REP; http://www.rochesterproject.org) to identify all residents of Olmsted County, Minnesota who reached one or more birthdays between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2014 (10 years). METHODS: For each person, we obtained the count of chronic conditions (out of 20 conditions) present on each birthday by extracting all of the diagnostic codes received in the 5 years before the index birthday from the electronic indexes of the REP. To compare each person's count to peers of same age, the counts were transformed into percentiles of the total population and displayed graphically across age by sex, race and ethnicity. In addition, quintiles 1, 2, 4 and 5 were compared with quintile 3 (reference) to predict the risk of death at 1 year, 5 years and through end of follow-up using time-to-event analyses. Follow-up was passive using the REP. RESULTS: We identified 238 010 persons who experienced a total of 1 458 094 birthdays during the study period (median of 6 birthdays per person; IQR 3-10). The percentiles of multimorbidity across age did not vary noticeably by sex, race or ethnicity. In general, there was an increased risk of mortality at 1 and 5 years for quintiles 4 and 5 of multimorbidity. The risk of mortality for quintile 5 was greater for younger age groups and for women. CONCLUSIONS: The assignment of multimorbidity percentiles to persons in a population may be a simple and intuitive tool to assess relative health status, and to predict short-term mortality, especially in younger persons and in women.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".