MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390061530 · doi:10.1111/jgs.18725

Physical frailty and survival time after the onset of functional disability: Is there a sex difference?

2023· article· en· W4390061530 on OpenAlexaff
Keitaro Makino, Parminder Raina, Lauren E. Griffith, Sangyoon Lee, Kenji Harada, Ippei Chiba, Osamu Katayama, Kouki Tomida, Masanori Morikawa, Hyuma Makizako, Hiroyuki Shimada

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsImpactMcMaster University Medical CentreMcMaster University
FundersJapan Science and Technology AgencyJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNational Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioGerontologyConfidence intervalCohort studyProportional hazards modelCohortInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Physical frailty accelerates the timing of both subsequent disability and death; however, evidence regarding the impact of frailty on the period from disability onset to death and sex differences of this impact is lacking. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship among physical frailty, disability, death, and sex differences. METHODS: This Japanese cohort study included 10,524 community-dwelling people aged ≥65 years. Physical frailty was operationalized by key phenotypes as per Fried's criteria (slowness, weakness, exhaustion, weight loss, and low activity) at baseline. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for disability onset and post-disability survival according to the frailty status. RESULTS: During a 5-year follow-up, the risk of disability onset for pre-frailty (HR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.51-2.00) and frailty (HR: 3.27, 95% CI: 2.77-3.87) were significantly higher than that for robust people. Furthermore, among participants who developed disabilities within 5 years (n = 1481), the risk of post-disability death for pre-frailty was not different from that for robust (HR: 1.49, 95% CI: 0.99-2.24), but frailty showed a higher risk of post-disability death than did robust people. (HR: 1.75, 95% CI: 1.13-2.72). In the sex-stratified analysis, although the female group showed no association between frailty status and post-disability death (HR: 1.21, 95% CI: 0.63-2.33 in pre-frailty; HR: 1.24, 95% CI: 0.60-2.57 in frailty), the male group showed higher risk of post-disability death in both pre-frailty (HR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.03-2.96) and frailty (HR: 2.32, 95% CI: 1.32-4.09). CONCLUSIONS: Physical frailty shortens the period from disability onset to death. Additionally, the impact of frailty on post-disability death is greater for males than for females. Our findings suggest that physical frailty is an important clinical indicator distinct from disability and that interventions to prevent and address frailty in men need further investigation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Geriatrics Society→Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→