MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391819390 · doi:10.1111/psyg.13087

Prevalence and risk factors of cognitive frailty among pre‐frail and frail older adults in nursing homes

2024· article· en· W4391819390 on OpenAlex
Yu Zhang, Min‐rui Li, Xin Chen, Yong‐ping Deng, Yuan‐hong Lin, Yuan‐xia Luo, Yulin Gao

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychogeriatrics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeriatric Depression ScaleMedicineActivities of daily livingOdds ratioGerontologyLogistic regressionCognitionDepression (economics)Stratified samplingCross-sectional studyMultivariate analysisPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatryDepressive symptoms

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this research was to stratify the level of frailty to examine the risk factors associated with reversible cognitive frailty (RCF) and potentially reversible cognitive frailty (PRCF) in nursing homes to provide a basis for hierarchical management in different stages of frailty. METHODS: The study was a cross-sectional study conducted from September to November 2022; 504 people were selected by stratified random sampling after convenience selection from the Home for the Aged Guangzhou. The structured questionnaire survey was conducted through face-to-face interviews using the general data questionnaire, Fried Frailty Phenotype, Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale. RESULTS: In total, 452 individuals were included for analysis. A total of 229 cases (50.7%) were PRCF, 70 (15.5%) were RCF. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that in pre-frailty, the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) score (odds ratio (OR) 1.802; 95% CI 1.308-2.483), Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale (IADL) score (0.352; 0.135-0.918) and energy (0.288; 0.110-0.755) were influencing factors of RCF. GDS-15 score (1.805; 1.320-2.468), IADL score (0.268; 0.105-0.682), energy (0.377; 0.150-0.947), lack of intellectual activity (6.118; 1.067-35.070), admission time(>3 years) (9.969; 1.893-52.495) and low education (3.465; 1.211-9.912) were influencing factors of PRCF. However, RCF with frailty was associated with the Short-Form Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA-SF) score (0.301; 0.123-0.739) and low education time (0 ~ 12 years) (0.021; 0.001-0.826). PRCF with frailty was associated with age (1.327; 1.081-1.629) and weekly exercise time (0.987; 0.979-0.995). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of RCF and PRCF was high among pre-frail and frail older adults in nursing homes. Different levels of frailty had different influencing factors for RCF and PRCF. Depression, daily living ability, energy, intellectual activity, admission time, education level, nutrition status, age and exercise time were associated with RCF and PRCF. Hierarchical management and intervention should be implemented for different stages of frailty to prevent or delay the progression of cognitive frailty.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.289 · 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