A chair-stand time of greater than 15 seconds is associated with an increased risk of death and hospitalization in cirrhosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Frailty is a clinical state of increased vulnerability and is common in patients with cirrhosis. The liver frailty index (LFI) is a validated tool to evaluate frailty in cirrhosis, comprising of grip strength, chair stands, and balance tests. The chair-stand test is an easy to conduct frailty subcomponent that does not require specialized equipment and may be valuable to predict adverse clinical outcomes in cirrhosis. The objective of this study was to determine if the chair-stand test is an independent predictor of mortality and hospitalization in cirrhosis. Methods: A retrospective review of 787 patients with cirrhosis was conducted. Chair-stand times were collected at baseline in person and divided into three groups: <10 seconds ( n = 276), 10–15 seconds ( n = 290), and >15 seconds ( n = 221). Fine-Gray proportional hazards regression models were used to evaluate the association between chair-stand times and the outcomes of mortality and non-elective hospitalization. Results: The hazard of mortality (HR 3.21, 95% CI 2.16%–4.78%, p <0.001) and non-elective hospitalization (HR 2.24, 95% CI 1.73%–2.91%, p <0.001) was increased in group 3 in comparison to group 1. A chair-stand test time >15 seconds had increased all-cause mortality (HR 2.78, 95% CI 2.01%–3.83%, p <0.001) and non-elective hospitalizations (HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.48%–2.29%, p <0.001) compared to <15 seconds. Conclusions: A chair-stand test time of >15 seconds is independently associated with mortality and non-elective hospitalizations. This test holds promise as a rapid prognostication tool in cirrhosis. Future work will include external validation and virtual assessment in this population.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".