MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4322504738 · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-29933-x

Frailty and pain in an acute private hospital: an observational point prevalence study

2023· article· en· W4322504738 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rosemary Saunders, Kate Crookes, Karla Seaman, Seng Giap Marcus Ang, Caroline Bulsara, Max Bulsara, Beverley Ewens, Olivia Gallagher, Renée Graham, Karen Gullick, Sue Haydon, J. C. Hughes, Kim‐Huong Nguyen, Bev OʼConnell, Debra Scaini, Christopher Etherton‐Beer

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRamsay Hospital Research FoundationEdith Cowan University
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyPsychological interventionRehabilitationChecklistMental healthMedical recordCross-sectional studyBrief Pain InventoryPhysical therapyChronic painEmergency medicineInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Frailty and pain in hospitalised patients are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. However, there is limited data on the associations between frailty and pain in this group of patients. Understanding the prevalence, distribution and interaction of frailty and pain in hospitals will help to determine the magnitude of this association and assist health care professionals to target interventions and develop resources to improve patient outcomes. This study reports the point prevalence concurrence of frailty and pain in adult patients in an acute hospital. A point prevalence, observational study of frailty and pain was conducted. All adult inpatients (excluding high dependency units) at an acute, private, 860-bed metropolitan hospital were eligible to participate. Frailty was assessed using the self-report modified Reported Edmonton Frail Scale. Current pain and worst pain in the last 24 h were self-reported using the standard 0-10 numeric rating scale. Pain scores were categorised by severity (none, mild, moderate, severe). Demographic and clinical information including admitting services (medical, mental health, rehabilitation, surgical) were collected. The STROBE checklist was followed. Data were collected from 251 participants (54.9% of eligible). The prevalence of frailty was 26.7%, prevalence of current pain was 68.1% and prevalence of pain in the last 24 h was 81.3%. After adjusting for age, sex, admitting service and pain severity, admitting services medical (AOR: 13.5 95% CI 5.7-32.8), mental health (AOR: 6.3, 95% CI 1. 9-20.9) and rehabilitation (AOR: 8.1, 95% CI 2.4-37.1) and moderate pain (AOR: 3.9, 95% CI 1. 6-9.8) were associated with increased frailty. The number of older patients identified in this study who were frail has implications for managing this group in a hospital setting. This indicates a need to focus on developing strategies including frailty assessment on admission, and the development of interventions to meet the care needs of these patients. The findings also highlight the need for increased pain assessment, particularly in those who are frail, for more effective pain management.Trial registration: The study was prospectively registered (ACTRN12620000904976; 14th September 2020).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→