Age- and sex-specific associations of frailty with mortality and healthcare utilization in community-dwelling adults from Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Understanding how health trajectories are related to the likelihood of adverse outcomes and healthcare utilization is key to planning effective strategies for improving health span and the delivery of care to older adults. Frailty measures are useful tools for risk stratification in community-based and primary care settings, although their effectiveness in adults younger than 60 is not well described. METHODS: We performed a 10-year retrospective analysis of secondary data from the Ontario Health Study, which included 161,149 adults aged ≥ 18. Outcomes including all-cause mortality and hospital admissions were obtained through linkage to ICES administrative databases with a median follow-up of 7.1-years. Frailty was characterized using a 30-item frailty index. RESULTS: Frailty increased linearly with age and was higher for women at all ages. A 0.1-increase in frailty was significantly associated with mortality (HR = 1.47), the total number of outpatient (IRR = 1.35) and inpatient (IRR = 1.60) admissions over time, and length of stay (IRR = 1.12). However, with exception to length of stay, these estimates differed depending on age and sex. The hazard of death associated with frailty was greater at younger ages, particularly in women. Associations with admissions also decreased with age, similarly between sexes for outpatient visits and more so in men for inpatient. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that frailty is an important health construct for both younger and older adults. Hence targeted interventions to reduce the impact of frailty before the age of 60 would likely have important economic and social implications in both the short- and long-term.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".