MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321452786 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066269

Association between frailty, chronic conditions and socioeconomic status in community-dwelling older adults attending primary care: a cross-sectional study using practice-based research network data

2023· article· en· W4321452786 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dee Mangin, J. S. Lawson, Cathy Risdon, Henry Siu, Tamar Packer, Sabrina T. Wong, Michelle Howard

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesSt Joseph's Health CareMcMaster UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaMcMaster University Medical Centre
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsMedicineCross-sectional studySocioeconomic statusGerontologyAssociation (psychology)EpidemiologyPrimary careMultiple Chronic ConditionsPublic healthEnvironmental healthFamily medicineChronic diseasePopulationNursingInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives Frailty is a multidimensional syndrome of loss of reserves in energy, physical ability, cognition and general health. Primary care is key in preventing and managing frailty, mindful of the social dimensions that contribute to its risk, prognosis and appropriate patient support. We studied associations between frailty levels and both chronic conditions and socioeconomic status (SES). Design Cross-sectional cohort study Setting A practice-based research network (PBRN) in Ontario, Canada, providing primary care to 38 000 patients. The PBRN hosts a regularly updated database containing deidentified, longitudinal, primary care practice data. Participants Patients aged 65 years or older, with a recent encounter, rostered to family physicians at the PBRN. Intervention Physicians assigned a frailty score to patients using the 9-point Clinical Frailty Scale. We linked frailty scores to chronic conditions and neighbourhood-level SES to examine associations between these three domains. Results Among 2043 patients assessed, the prevalence of low (scoring 1–3), medium (scoring 4–6) and high (scoring 7–9) frailty was 55.8%, 40.3%, and 3.8%, respectively. The prevalence of five or more chronic diseases was 11% among low-frailty, 26% among medium-frailty and 44% among high-frailty groups (χ 2 =137.92, df 2, p<0.001). More disabling conditions appeared in the top 50% of conditions in the highest-frailty group compared with the low and medium groups. Increasing frailty was significantly associated with lower neighbourhood income (χ 2 =61.42, df 8, p<0.001) and higher neighbourhood material deprivation (χ 2 =55.24, df 8, p<0.001). Conclusion This study demonstrates the triple disadvantage of frailty, disease burden and socioeconomic disadvantage. Frailty care needs a health equity approach: we demonstrate the utility and feasibility of collecting patient-level data within primary care. Such data can relate social risk factors, frailty and chronic disease towards flagging patients with the greatest need and creating targeted interventions.

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 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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.329
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations37
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207