From Hospital to Home: Validating a Cognitive-Functional Evaluation of Elders (COFEE-HD)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Increase in hospitalizations of older adults emphasizes the need for efficient hospital discharge planning to enable optimal reentry upon returning home. Yet few assessments offer an extensive picture of the older adult's functional-cognitive state. A comprehensive assessment for discharge planning together with a written summary can be beneficial to the older adult and family. Purpose. This quantitative study compared a modified version of a previously validated tool COFEE (cognitive OT functional evaluation of elders), for use in the hospital, HD (hospital discharge) with standard hospitals assessments. Methods. Of the 77 participants recruited in hospital, home assessments were conducted 4 months later on 64 participants. Findings. The COFEE-HD scores (physical functioning, personal and environmental safety and meta cognitive functioning) were significantly correlated with standard hospital measures and with the home assessment. Implications. The COFEE-HD was found to have a high level of validity in a hospital setting, and the resulting evaluation can provide important insights into function, safety and cognitive function for post-discharge behaviors.
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 | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".