MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392856095 · doi:10.61091/jpms202413112

Investigation of the Effect of Frailty Levels of Elderly Patients on their Recovery Status after General Surgery

2024· article· en· W4392856095 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gülay Oyur Çelik, Nagehan Evkaya

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pioneering Medical Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGerontologyEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim/Objective: The level of frailty increases in the elderly population. It is known that preoperative frailty may cause negative consequences in the postoperative period. This study aimed to determine the effect of preoperative frailty level on postoperative recovery of elderly patients undergoing surgery in general surgery clinics. Material and Method: The research is descriptive - cross-sectional type. The study was conducted between September 1 Eylül, 2021, and October 31, 2022. The study population consisted of 242 patients aged 65 and over who underwent surgery in the General Surgery Clinic. The study sample consisted of 97 patients selected by random sampling method. "Patient Information Form," "Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS)," and "Postoperative Recovery Index (PoRI)" were used for data collection. Data were collected in 3 stages: preoperatively, postoperatively, and after discharge. In the first stage, patient information form and EFS were applied in the preoperative period. In the second stage, PoRI was performed between 24-48 hours in the postoperative period. In the third stage, the PoRI was re-administered at the time of the patient's first visit to the outpatient clinic (on average 1-2 weeks later). Face-to-face and telephone interviews were used to collect the data. Data were evaluated in the IBM Statistics (SPSS) 25.0 program. Quantitative data in the study were shown as number, percentage, mean, and standard deviation values. Kolmogorov Smirnov test, One-Way ANOVA, Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal Wallis test, and Shapiro Wilk test were applied when necessary. Cronbach's Alpha value was 0.784 for the Edmonton Frailty Scale, and the Postoperative Recovery Index was 0.950 in the first and 0.941 in the second measurement. All ethical permissions were obtained. Results: The mean age of the patients included in the study was 70.82 6.47 years. It was found that 54.7% of the patients were male, and 90.3% were not working. In the Edmonton Frail Scale's measurements, approximately 73.1% of the elderly patients were found to be frail, although their level was different. In the study, PoRI mean1 = 2.9 0.99 in the first 48 hours and PoRI mean2 = 2.0 0.74 in the post-discharge control time. There is a significant difference between EFS and PoRI- 1st and EFS and PoRI- 2nd measurements. It was found that patients with higher mean EFS had more difficulty in recovery. As the patients' frailty level increased, difficulties were identified in improving psychological, physical, nutritional, and general symptoms. When EFS and sociodemographic characteristics were compared, it was observed that elderly individuals with low income had higher rates of frailty. Conclusion: Research results show that the level of frailty present before surgery delays recovery in the postoperative period. Patients aged 65 years and older also have a significantly high level of frailty. In this context, it would be appropriate to conduct frailty screening with measurement tools to determine the level of frailty in the preoperative period for elderly patients and to evaluate the care to be applied accordingly. In this way, frailty, an inhibiting factor in front of recovery, can be managed and will constitute evidence for objective consideration.

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)0.005
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pioneering Medical ScienceSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207