Low Physical Performance is Associated with a Poor Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) in Community-Dwelling Older Mexicans”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Identify the association between low physical performance and quality of life in older adults. MethodsCross-sectional analysis of the FraDySMex cohort study (Frailty, Daphnia and Sarcopenia in Mexican Adults). The physical performance was evaluated by Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), and the quality of life through the Visual Analogue Scale of the EuroQol-5D for the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL). In addition, other variables such as socio-demographic, comorbidity, cognitive status, depressive symptoms, anxiety, frailty, and functional dependence were evaluated. Results 624 adults were included, 79.13% (CI 95% 75.72–82.26) women, aged 71.1±9.5 years. The prevalence of low physical performance frequency was 32.47% (CI 95% 28.88–36.31) and low HRQOL of 28.57% (CI 95% 25.05–32.29). The low physical performance was associated with a low HRQOL (OR= 2.09; CI 95% 1.35-3.23; p=.001), adjusted for age, sex, comorbidity index, cognitive, anxiety, and depressive symptoms in the logistic regression. Conclusion The low physical performance is associated with a low quality of life in older people.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".