MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3139972922 · doi:10.36150/2499-6564-n343

Factors associated with history of fall among older people in Southern West Bank

2021· article· en· W3139972922 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Manal Badrasawi, Nihal Natour, Alaa Jaradat

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gerontology and Geriatrics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnthropometryDemographyMedicineGeriatric Depression ScaleWaistGerontologyDepression (economics)CognitionBody mass indexDepressive symptomsPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective. Older men and women have higher risk of fall due to various factors. Among Palestinian older adults fall history yet to be studied in terms of prevalence and correlates. The primary objective of this study is to determine the prevalence of fall and the differences between fallers and non-fallers among a group of Palestinian older living in rural areas in Southern West Bank region of Hebron. Methods. The study included 142 participants from two villages: Se’ar and Bani Na’em, Hebron governance. Demographic variables and fall history was collected. Anthropometric measurement were used to assess nutritional status; physical function was assessed. Geriatric scale for depression and Montreal cognitive assessment test. Results. 51.7% of study participants were females, the mean age 69.5 5.7 years old. Positive fall history was present among 11.7% mostly females. Significant relationship was found between fall and larger waist and hip circumference, cognitive impairment, higher level of dependency and slower performance in time up and go (TUG) p < 0.05. Conclusions. Fall history has considerable prevalence among the study sample and it is correlated with nutritional status, cognitive and physical function.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Gerontology and Geriatrics→Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→