Cardiometabolic multimorbidity and activity limitation: a cross-sectional study of adults using the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiometabolic multimorbidity (CM) is the diagnosis of 2 or more cardiometabolic conditions. Multimorbidity and individual cardiometabolic conditions have been associated with activity limitation, a common form of disability, but few studies have investigated the association between CM and activity limitation. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of activity limitation among Canadians with CM and to quantify the association between CM and activity limitation. METHODS: Using data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging, we conducted a cross-sectional analysis of activity limitation among Canadians aged 45-85 (n = 50,777; weighted n = 13,118,474). CM was defined as the diagnosis of 2 or more of diabetes/prediabetes, myocardial infarction, and stroke, and activity limitation was evaluated using the Older Americans Resources and Services scale. Descriptive statistics and logistic and multinomial logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine the association between CM and activity limitation. RESULTS: The estimated prevalence of activity limitation among participants living with CM was 27.4% compared with 7.5% with no cardiometabolic conditions. Activity limitation increased in prevalence and severity with the number of cardiometabolic conditions. People with CM had increased odds of activity limitation compared with those without any cardiometabolic conditions (adjusted relative risk ratio = 3.99, 95% confidence interval [3.35-4.75]), and the odds increased with each additional condition. Stroke survivors had greater odds of activity limitation than those without a history of stroke and the same number of cardiometabolic conditions. CONCLUSION: Activity limitation is common among Canadians living with CM. Odds of activity limitation increase with each additional cardiometabolic condition, especially for stroke survivors.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".