MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159115810 · doi:10.1111/jgs.17187

<scp>Life‐space</scp> mobility and healthcare costs and utilization in older men

2021· article· en· W3159115810 on OpenAlexaff
Kerry M. Sheets, Allyson M. Kats, Lisa Langsetmo, Dawn C. Mackey, Howard A Fink, Susan J. Diem, Wei Duan‐Porter, Peggy M. Cawthon, John T. Schousboe, Kristine E. Ensrud

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalOdds ratioDemographyHealth careGerontologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine the association of life-space score with subsequent healthcare costs and utilization. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study (Osteoporotic Fracture in Men [MrOS]). SETTING: Six U.S. sites. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1555 community-dwelling men (mean age 79.3 years; 91.5% white, non-Hispanic) participating in the MrOS Year 7 (Y7) examination linked with their Medicare claims data. MEASUREMENTS: Life-space during the past month was assessed as 0 (daily restriction to one's bedroom) to 120 (daily trips outside one's town without assistance) and categorized (0-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-120). Total annualized direct healthcare costs and utilization were ascertained during 36 months after the Y7 examination. RESULTS: Mean total annualized costs (2020 U.S. dollars) steadily increased across category of life-space score, from $7954 (standard deviation [SD] 16,576) among men with life-space scores of 101-120 to $26,430 (SD 28,433) among men with life-space scores of 0-40 (p < 0.001). After adjustment for demographics, men with a life-space score of 0-40 versus men with a life-space score of 101-120 had greater mean total costs (cost ratio [CR] = 2.52; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.84-3.45) and greater risk of subsequent hospitalization (odds ratio [OR] 4.72, 95% CI 2.61-8.53) and skilled nursing facility (SNF) stay (OR 7.32, 95% CI 3.65-14.66). Life-space score was no longer significantly associated with total healthcare costs (CR for 0-40 vs 101-120 1.29; 95% CI 0.91-1.84) and hospitalization (OR 1.76, 95% CI 0.89-3.51) after simultaneous consideration of demographics, medical factors, self-reported health and function, and the frailty phenotype; the association of life-space with SNF stay remained significant (OR 2.86, 95% CI 1.26-6.49). CONCLUSION: Our results highlight the importance of function and mobility in predicting future healthcare costs and suggest the simple and convenient life-space score may in part capture risks from major geriatric domains and improve identification of older, community-dwelling men likely to require costly care.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations32
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Geriatrics SocietySame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207