MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Precisão da medida de mobilidade no espaço de vida para discriminar fragilidade e sarcopenia em idosos

2022· article· pt· W4285226940 on OpenAlexaff
Maria do Carmo Correia de Lima, Mônica Rodrigues Perracini, Ricardo Oliveira Guerra, Flávia Silva Arbex Borim, Mônica Sanches Yassuda, Anita Liberalesso Néri

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Brasileira de Geriatria e Gerontologia · 2022
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSarcopeniaMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resumo Objetivo Identificar o perfil de mobilidade nos espaços de vida em idosos que vivem na comunidade e estabelecer a precisão dos pontos de corte desse instrumento para discriminar entre níveis de fragilidade, fragilidade em marcha e de risco de sarcopenia. Método Estudo observacional e metodológico com 391 participantes com 72 anos e mais (80,4±4,6), que responderam ao Life Space Assessment (LSA) e a medidas de rastreio de fragilidade e risco de sarcopenia usando respectivamente o fenótipo de fragilidade e o SARC-F. Os pontos de corte para fragilidade e risco de sarcopenia foram determinados por meio da Curva ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristic) com intervalos de confiança de 95%. Resultados A média da pontuação no LSA foi 53,6±21,8. Os pontos de corte de melhor acurácia diagnóstica foram ≤54 pontos para fragilidade em marcha (AUC= 0,645 95%; p<0,001) e ≤60 pontos para risco de sarcopenia (AUC= 0,651 95%; p<0,001). Conclusão A capacidade de idosos de se deslocar nos vários níveis de espaços de vida, avaliado pelo LSA demonstrou ser uma ferramenta viável que pode contribuir no rastreio de fragilidade em marcha e de risco de sarcopenia e, com isso, prevenir desfechos negativos.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Brasileira de Geriatria e GerontologiaSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207