Prevalence of falls among frail elderly adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To measure the prevalence in frail elderly people, their consequences and associated demographic factors. METHODS This was an epidemiological and cross-sectional study with a probabilistic sample composed of 240 elderly people (≥ 60 years) living in Ribeirão Preto, Sao Paulo state. Data were collected between November 2010 and February 2011, through a questionnaire that included socio-demographic data, fall assessment and the Edmonton Frailty Scale. Uni-variate and bivariate analyses were carried out. RESULTS The mean age was 73.5 (± 8.4), with higher ages among women; 25% of the interviewees were aged 80 or older; 11.3% presented moderate frailty and 9.6% severe frailty. The prevalence of falls in frail elderly participants corresponded to 38.6%; higher levels were found among women and younger subjects (60 to 79 years old); 26.8% were victims of 1 to 2 falls, 27.1% of which occurred in the bedroom, 84.7% fell from their own height, 55.9% lost their balance, 54.2% suffered scratches and 78% were afraid of suffering a new fall. Higher fall prevalence levels were found in frail elderly 1,973 (1,094-3,556) compared to non-frail. CONCLUSIONS We highlight the importance of addressing the health of frail elderly people, especially regarding the risk of falls, as well as of increasing investment in prevention strategies of these syndromes and in the formation of train like a virgin ed human resources to better care for this population.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".