MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Frailty in people with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review of observational studies

2022· review· en· W4296711918 on OpenAlex
Peter Hanlon, Holly Morrison, Fraser Morton, Bhautesh Jani, Stefan Siebert, Jim Lewsey, David McAllister, Frances S Mair

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWellcome Open Research · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineChecklistObservational studyRheumatoid arthritisQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyPhysical therapyDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Background:</ns4:bold> Frailty, an age-related decline in physiological reserve, is an increasingly important concept in the management of chronic diseases. The implications of frailty in people with rheumatoid arthritis are not well understood. We undertook a systematic review to assess prevalence of frailty in people with rheumatoid arthritis, and the relationship between frailty and disease activity or clinical outcomes. </ns4:p> <ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Methods:</ns4:bold> We searched four electronic databases (January 2001 to April 2021) for observational studies assessing the prevalence of frailty (any frailty measure) in adults (≥18 years) with rheumatoid arthritis, or analysing the relationship between frailty and disease activity or clinical outcomes (e.g. quality of life, hospitalisation or mortality) in people with rheumatoid arthritis. Study quality was assessed using an adapted Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Screening, quality assessment and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. We used narrative synthesis. </ns4:p> <ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Results:</ns4:bold> We identified 17 analyses, from 14 different populations. 15/17 were cross-sectional. Studies used 11 different measures of frailty. Frailty prevalence ranged from 10% (frailty phenotype) to 36% (comprehensive rheumatologic assessment of frailty) in general adult populations with rheumatoid arthritis. In younger populations (&lt;60 or &lt;65 years) prevalence ranged from 2.4% (frailty phenotype) to 19.9% (Kihon checklist) while in older populations (&gt;60 or &gt;65) prevalence ranged from 31.2% (Kihon checklist) to 55% (Geriatric 8 tool). Frailty was cross-sectionally associated with higher disease activity (10/10 studies), lower physical function (7/7 studies) and longer disease duration (2/5 studies), and with hospitalization and osteoporotic fractures (1/1 study, 3.7 years follow-up). </ns4:p> <ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Conclusion:</ns4:bold> Frailty is common in rheumatoid arthritis, including those aged &lt;65 years, and is associated with a range of adverse features. However, these is heterogeneity in how frailty is measured. We found few longitudinal studies making the impact of frailty on clinical outcomes over time and the extent to which frailty is caused by rheumatoid arthritis unclear. </ns4:p>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.471
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.031 · 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