MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392862567 · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-56606-0

Exploring trajectories of functional decline and recovery among older adults: a data-driven approach

2024· article· en· W4392862567 on OpenAlexafffund
Ghazal Khalili, Manaf Zargoush, Kai Huang, Somayeh Ghazalbash

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsActivities of daily livingPsychological interventionQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyIndependent livingDiversity (politics)PsychologyMedicineData scienceComputer scienceNursingPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Independently performing activities of daily living (ADLs) is vital for maintaining one's quality of life. Losing this ability can significantly impact an individual's overall health status, including their mental health and social well-being. Aging is an important factor contributing to the loss of ADL abilities, and our study focuses on investigating the trajectories of functional decline and recovery in older adults. Employing trajectory analytics methodologies, this research delves into the intricate dynamics of ADL pathways, unveiling their complexity, diversity, and inherent characteristics. The study leverages a substantial dataset encompassing ADL assessments of nursing home residents with diverse disability profiles in the United States. The investigation begins by transforming these assessments into sequences of disability combinations, followed by applying various statistical measures, indicators, and visual analytics. Valuable insights are gained into the typical disability states, transitions, and patterns over time. The results also indicate that while predicting the progression of ADL disabilities presents manageable challenges, the duration of these states proves more complicated. Our findings hold significant potential for improving healthcare decision-making by enabling clinicians to anticipate possible patterns, develop targeted and effective interventions that support older patients in preserving their independence, and enhance overall care quality.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→