Feasibility of Virtual Assessment of Physical Frailty in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients – A Single Centre, Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To describe the feasibility of virtual assessments of physical frailty in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients using a modified Fried Frailty Index (mFFI) and Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), and to describe the prevalence of frailty 12-months post-transplant using virtual assessment. Methods: Virtual assessments were performed using an e-questionnaire and a video-call for functional tests. Feasibility variables included: internet quality, video-call duration, presence of a companion, and adverse events. Results: 34 SOT recipients, median age 62 (46-67), 76% lung recipients, 47% female, were included. The video-call had a median duration of 12 minutes (10-15 min), without adverse events. A companion was present in 23 (68%) video-call assessments. Fifteen SOT recipients (44%) were classified as pre-frail by the mFFI, and none were frail. Three participants (8.8%) were classified as frail using the SPPB. Conclusion: Virtual frailty assessments can be used as an alternative to in-person assessments in SOT recipients.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".