MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4288612404

The impact of frailty on prolonged hospitalization and mortality in elderly inpatients in Vietnam: a comparison between the frailty phenotype and the Reported Edmonton Frail Scale

2019· article· en· W4288612404 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nguyen AT, Nguyen TX, Nguyen TN, R Cumming, Hilmer SN, Vu HTT

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFrailty IndexGerontologyScale (ratio)Geography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anh Trung Nguyen,1,2 Thanh Xuan Nguyen,1,2 Tu N Nguyen,1,3 Thu Hoai Thi Nguyen,1,2,4 Thang Pham,1,2 Robert Cumming,5 Sarah N Hilmer,6 Huyen Thi Thanh Vu1,2 1The National Geriatric Hospital, Hanoi, Vietnam; 2Department of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam; 3Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada; 4Dinh Tien Hoang Institute of Medicine, Hanoi, Vietnam; 5Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; 6Departments of Clinical Pharmacology and Aged Care, Royal North Shore Hospital and Kolling Institute of Medical Research, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia Aims: To investigate the impact of frailty on outcomes in older hospitalized patients, including prolonged length of stay and all-cause mortality 6 months after admission, using both the frailty phenotype and the Reported Edmonton Frail Scale (REFS).Patients and methods: This study is the follow-up phase of a study designed to investigate the prevalence of frailty and its impact on adverse outcomes in older hospitalized patients at the National Geriatric Hospital in Hanoi, Vietnam.Results: A total of 461 participants were included, with a mean age 76.2±8.9 years, and 56.8% were female. The prevalence of frailty was 31.9% according to the REFS and 35.4% according to Fried’s criteria. The kappa coefficient was 0.57 (95% CI =0.49–0.66) between the two frailty criteria in identifying frail and non-frail participants. There was a trend toward increasing the likelihood of prolonged hospitalization in participants with frailty defined by Fried’s criteria (adjusted OR =1.49, 95% CI =0.94–2.35) or by REFS (adjusted OR =1.43, 95% CI =0.89–2.29). During 6 months of follow-up, 210 were lost and 18/251 (7.2%) participants died. Mortality was higher in those with frailty defined by either Fried’s criteria or REFS. On multivariable survival analysis, adjusted HRs for mortality were 2.65 (95% CI =1.02–6.89) for Fried’s criteria and 4.19 (95% CI =1.59–10.99) for REFS.Conclusion: Fried’s frailty phenotype or REFS can be used as a screening tool to detect frailty in older inpatients in Vietnam and predict mortality. Frailty screening can help prioritize targeted frailty-tailored treatments, such as nutrition, early mobility and medication review, for these vulnerable patients to improve clinical outcomes. Keywords: frailty, elderly, inpatients, Vietnam

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.354 · 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→