Reproducibility and validity of the Portuguese Edmonton Frail Scale version in cardiac surgery patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Frailty is a multidimensional syndrome characterized by the loss of functional reserve, associated with higher mortality and less functional survival in cardiac surgery patients. The Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS) is a comprehensive tool devised for brief frailty detection. To the best of our knowledge, there are no culturally adapted and validated frailty screening tools that enable the identification of vulnerability domains suited for use in the preoperative setting in Portugal. This was the motivation for this study. To assess the validity and reproducibility of the Portuguese version of the EFS. Prospective observational study, in a sample of elective cardiac surgery patients. The Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS) translation and backtranslation were performed. Demographic and clinical data were collected, and the translated EFS translated, Geriatric Depression Scale, and Mini Mental State Examination Portuguese versions, Katz and Clinical Frailty Scales were administered. To assess validity Mann–Whitney test, Spearman's correlation coefficient, marginal homogeneity test and Kappa coefficient were employed. Reproducibility was assessed estimating kappa coefficient for the frailty diagnosis and the 11 EFS items. Intra-class correlation coefficients and the corresponding 95% confidence interval were estimated using linear mixed effects model. The EFS Portuguese version revealed construct validity for frailty identification, as well as criterion validity for cognition and mood domains. Reproducibility was demonstrated, with k=0.62 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42–0.82) and intraclass correlation (ICC)=0.94 (95% CI 0.89–0.97) in inter-observer test and k=0.48 (95% CI 0.26–0.70) and ICC=0.85 (95% CI 0.72–0.92) in intra-observer test. The EFS Portuguese version is valid and reproducible for use, suiting pre-operative frailty screening in a cardiac surgery setting. A fragilidade é uma síndrome multidimensional caracterizada pela perda de reserva funcional, associada a maior mortalidade e menor sobrevivência funcional após cirurgia cardíaca. A Escala de Fragilidade de Edmonton (EFS) é uma ferramenta abrangente de deteção de fragilidade. Não existe ainda em Portugal uma ferramenta de rastreio culturalmente adaptada e validada que permita a identificação de domínios específicos de vulnerabilidade para utilização no pré-operatório. Avaliar a validade e reprodutibilidade da versão portuguesa da EFS. Estudo prospetivo observacional, realizado numa amostra de doentes propostos para cirurgia cardíaca. A EFS foi traduzida e retrotraduzida. Colheram-se dados demográficos e clínicos, aplicaram-se as versões traduzidas da EFS, Escala de Depressão Geriátrica e MMSE, as escalas de Katz e Clinical Frailty Scale. Validade avaliada utilizando o teste de Mann-Whitney, o coeficiente de correlação de Spearman, o teste de homogeneidade marginal e o coeficiente Kappa. Reprodutibilidade avaliada pelo cálculo do coeficiente kappa para o diagnóstico de fragilidade e para os 11 itens da escala. Coeficientes de correlação intraclasse e correspondentes intervalos de confiança a 95% estimados usando um modelo linear de efeitos mistos. A versão portuguesa da EFS demonstrou validade de constructo, assim como validade de critério nos domínios de cognição e humor. É reprodutível, com k=0,62 (95% IC 0,42-0,82) e CCI=0,94 (95% IC 0,89-0,97) no teste interobservador e k=0,48 (95% IC 0,26-0,70) e CCI=0,85 (95% IC 0,72-0,92) no teste intraobservador. A versão portuguesa da EFS é adequada para rastreio pré-operatório de fragilidade em cirurgia cardíaca.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".