(Frailty syndrome, what should we know before cardiac surgery)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Syndrom kĹehkosti je klinickĂ˝ syndrom, ve kterĂŠm jsou pĹĂtomny tĹi nebo vĂce z nĂĄsledujĂcĂch kritĂŠriĂ: neĂşmyslnĂ˝ Ăşbytek hmotnosti 4,5 kg (10 liber) za poslednĂ rok, pacientem udĂĄvanĂĄ vyÄerpanost, slabĂĄ svalovĂĄ sĂla Ăşchopu, pomalĂĄ rychlost chĹŻze a snĂĹženĂĄ fyzickĂĄ aktivita. Prevalence kĹehkosti u kardiochirurgickĂ˝ch pacientĹŻ je podle dostupnĂ˝ch studiĂ od 4,1 % do 46 %. Je spojenĂ˝ s vĂ˝skytem sarkopenie a osteoporĂłzy. Pro diagnostiku v kardiochirurgii je vhodnĂ˝ nĂĄstroj Edmonton Frail Scale, kterĂ˝ je vyvinut pro negeriatrickĂŠ specialisty a poskytuje informace ohlednÄ zĂĄvislosti pacienta na okolĂ, znalost zvlĂĄdĂĄnĂ bÄĹžnĂ˝ch dennĂch aktivit a ĂşrovnÄ fyzickĂŠ zdatnosti. Existuje ĹĄirokĂĄ ĹĄkĂĄla dalĹĄĂch nĂĄstrojĹŻ k hodnocenĂ. Syndrom kĹehkosti je nezĂĄvislĂ˝ rizikovĂ˝ faktor zvýťenĂŠ morbidity, mortality a prodlouĹženĂŠ doby hospitalizace po kardiochirurgickĂŠ operaci. Tito pacienti majĂ vysokĂŠ riziko neĂşspÄchu zvolenĂŠho terapeutickĂŠho postupu. ZĂĄkladem pĂŠÄe o rizikovĂŠ pacienty je screening a prevence vzniku syndromu kĹehkosti. DĂĄ se mu pĹedejĂt dostateÄnou fyzickou aktivitou, zdravĂ˝m ĹživotnĂm stylem a pravidelnĂ˝m kognitivnĂm trĂŠninkem. © 2023, ÄKS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
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".