[Relation between grip strength of independent elders and functional decline following an emergency department visit : a pan-Canadian study].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether grip strength and fear of falling are associated with functional decline at 3 or 6 months after a minor trauma assessed in the emergency department. METHOD: Prospective multicenter cohort study of patient's aged 65 years and older, independent for activities of daily living, consulting the emergency department for minor trauma. Functional status, fear of falling, and grip strength measurements were collected. Functional decline was measured at 3 and 6 months. STATISTICS: Two groups were compared : one with functional decline, the other without. A ROC curve explored the predictive power of grip strength and initial fear of falling on the occurrence of functional decline. RESULTS: Participants were 74.7 years old, 52 % men. Initial peak grip strengths were identical (p superior to 0.05). Grip strength and fear of falling were not predictive of functional decline (p = 0.55 and p = 0.53). However, fear of falling was associated with functional decline (OR: 1.141 95 % CI [1.032-1.261]; p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: In the autonomous elder with minor trauma in the emergency department, grip strength is not associated with subsequent functional decline. But fear of falling is associated with decline at 6 months.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".