MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402367836 · doi:10.1002/epi4.13046

The implications of frailty in older adults with epilepsy

2024· review· en· W4402367836 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia Open · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmacological Effects and Toxicity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsPolypharmacyFrailty syndromeMedicineGerontologyEpilepsyComorbidityDiseaseAffect (linguistics)SarcopeniaStressorFrailty IndexPsychiatryPsychologyIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Older adults constitute a large proportion of people with epilepsy (PWE) due to the changing demographics worldwide and epilepsy's natural history. Aging-related pathophysiological changes lower the tolerance and increase our vulnerability to stressors, which manifests as frailty. Frailty is closely associated with adverse health outcomes. This narrative review examines the interplay between frailty and epilepsy, especially in older adults, emphasizing its clinical implications, including its role in managing PWE. Mechanistically, frailty develops through complex interactions among molecular and cellular damage, including genomic instability, mitochondrial dysfunction, and hormonal changes. These contribute to systemic muscle mass, bone density, and organ function decline. The concept of frailty has evolved from a primarily physical syndrome to include social, psychological, and cognitive dimensions. The "phenotypic frailty" model, which focuses on physical performance, and the "deficit accumulation" model, which quantifies health deficits, provide frameworks for understanding and assessing frailty. PWE are potentially more prone to developing frailty due to a higher prevalence of risk factors predisposing to frailty. These include, but are not limited to, polypharmacy, higher comorbidity, low exercise level, social isolation, low vitamin D, and osteoporosis. We lack commercial biomarkers to measure frailty but can diagnose it using self- or healthcare provider-administered frailty scales. Recent attempts to develop a PWE-specific frailty scale are promising. Unlike chronological age, frailty is reversible, so its management using multidisciplinary care teams should be strongly considered. Frailty can affect antiseizure medication (ASM) tolerance secondary to its impact on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. While frailty's effect on seizure control efficacy of ASM is poorly understood, its undoubted association with overall poor outcomes, including epilepsy surgery, behooves us to consider its presence and implication while treating older PWE. Incorporation of frailty measures in future research is essential to improve our understanding of frailty's role in PWE health. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Frailty is the declining state of the human body. People with epilepsy are more prone to it. It should be factored into their management.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.556

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.349 · 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