Loss of Independence in Older Adults With Operable Oral Cavity Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the effect of curative-intent surgery on loss of independence (LOI) in patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OCSCC). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective observational study of patients diagnosed from 2014 to 2021. SETTING: Single tertiary care academic center. Patients having undergone curative-intent surgical treatment for OCSCC from 2014 to 2021 in the cancer registry. METHODS: LOI as the primary outcome was measured based on a combination of decrease in activities of daily living (ADLs) and/or decline in mobility during treatment. Descriptive statistics were used to compare baseline demographics and multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association between LOI and perioperative variables of interest. RESULTS: Of the 180 patients included in this study, 139 (79%) were fully independent in ADLs/instrumental ADLs prior to surgery. The average age of the cohort was 74 with 49% males. Thirty-seven (21%) experienced a decline in mobility or increased care needs following surgery, and 18 (10%) experienced an independent decline in functional status. Increasing age, osseous flap reconstruction, high Charlson Comorbidity Index, and major postoperative adverse events were associated with LOI. Fifty-five percent of patients with LOI had recovered to baseline within 7 months from surgery. LOI was associated with poor treatment tolerance (odds ratio: 4.77, 95% confidence interval: 1.87-12.2) while adjusting for multiple confounders. CONCLUSION: LOI is common in older adults undergoing curative-intent surgery for OCSCC and associated with poor treatment tolerance.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".