The relative impact of socioeconomic position and frailty varies by population setting
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Frailty and socioeconomic position (SEP) are well-established determinants of health. However, we know less about the contributions of frailty and SEP in older adults, especially in acute settings. We set out to answer how frailty and SEP might influence health outcomes in older people, comparing a population sample and patients managed by a speciality acute frailty service. Methods: We used the Delirium and Population Health Informatics Cohort, a population sample of 1510 individuals aged ≥70 years from the London Borough of Camden and 1750 acute frailty patients. SEP was determined using the Index of Multiple Deprivation. Linear and Cox proportional hazard regression models were conducted to assess SEP on frailty, readmission, and mortality outcomes. Results: < 0.005). Increasing SEP, age, and admission status among hospitalized individuals were associated with greater frailty. For individuals seen by the speciality frailty service, SEP was not associated with frailty, mortality, or readmission. Discussion: When older people experience acute illness severe enough to require secondary care, particularly specialist services, this overcomes any prior advantages conferred by a higher SEP.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it