MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137441763 · doi:10.1093/ageing/afab030.93

132 Physical Function Comparison of Acutely Unwell COVID-Negative Older Adults Pre-Pandemic and Through-Pandemic; “Covid-Protected”

2021· article· en· W3137441763 on OpenAlexaff
S. Ritchie, C. Snape, N. Triteos, R. Vamadevan, L Olesk, C.-A. Wood, Gareth Jones, J. Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueAge and Ageing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Isolation (microbiology)Social isolationDemographyGerontologyInternal medicinePsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction The risk of severe morbidity after COVID-19 infection is high in older adults (Lithander et al, 2020). Subsequent responsive UK Government guidance for older adults included self-isolation during the pandemic. It is therefore hypothesised that during the pandemic older adults are inadvertently deconditioned due to iatrogenic factors such as inactivity, social isolation, hospital-avoidance and malnutrition, and present with reduced resilience to illness and lower levels of function. The OPU continued to admit COVID-negative, or recently termed “COVID-protected”, patients throughout the pandemic. Data captured prior to, and during the COVID-19 pandemic has been compared to explore the implications on older adults, and elicit whether they are protected from the consequences of the pandemic? Method Demographic and physical function data (average 6 m gait-speed, Elderly Mobility Scale) were captured pre- and through-pandemic for all patients admitted to a COVID-negative OPU ward over a one month period. Ethical review was provided through local Trust governance process. Results Pre-pandemic 2019 (n = 67, mean(±SD) age 82.7(±8.2) years, 61%, hospital length-of-stay (LOS) 7.9(±7.3) days, hospital mortality-rate 7.2%) and through-pandemic 2020 (n = 73, 83.1(±8.3) years, 59%♀, LOS 9.0(±9.1) days, hospital mortality-rate 7.5%) data were captured during July 2019 and May 2020 respectively. There were no between-group differences in age [t(−.313) = 138, p = 0.755], gender [X2, 1 df, p = 0.782], LOS [t(0.78) = 134, p = 0.44], or hospital mortality-rate [X2 1 df, p = 0.96]. Through-pandemic patients had a significantly slower 6 m gait-speed (0.11(±0.05) m.s-1) than pre-pandemic (0.16(±0.24) m.s-1); [t(2.74) = 93, p = 0.007] and lower median (IQR) Elderly Mobility Scale (4(6 IQR) vs 9 (12 IQR) [u = 866, p = 0.015]). Conclusion Our data indicates this relatively short period of self-isolation might have significant implications on the physical function of older adults. The likely mechanism is iatrogenic deconditioning. Critical Public Health and policy responses are required to mitigate these unforeseen risks by deploying prehabilitative counter-measures and accurately targeted hospital and community rehabilitation.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.529
Threshold uncertainty score0.938

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAge and AgeingSame topicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19French-language works237,207