The Effects of Mild Cognitive Impairment on Fall Severity in Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Falls affect more than 30% of older adults and are one of the leading causes of injury, hospitalization, and mortality in this populations. Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is one of the risk factors for falls in older adults. The purpose of this study is to determine if older adults with MCI have increased fall severity than older adults without MCI. Participants (n: 81: age: 79 ± 6) completed a Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and a Hopkins Falls Grading Scale, a tool used to grade the severity of falls on a scale of 1-4 (1 = loss of balance without fall; 4 = fall requiring hospital admission). Participants were categorized as having MCI (score <26: N: 44: age: 81 ± 6.4) or non-MCI (score ≥26: n: 37: age: 77 ± 6). Groups were analyzed using a one-way ANOVA in SPSS to compare the severity of falls within the previous 12 months. There were no differences between groups for fall grade 1 (p =.22) or fall grade 2 (p =.45). There was a significant difference between groups for fall grade 3 (p =.04) and fall grade 4 (p =.05) with the MCI group having more of these falls compared to the non-MCI group. Older adults with MCI had a higher number of falls requiring medical attention than older adults without MCI. Although falls are a risk in all older adults, those with MCI may be at higher risk of more injurious falls than older adults without MCI.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".