New Disability in a Cohort Study of Older Men—The Manitoba Follow-Up Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There is a large literature on the prevalence of disability in older men, but less data on the incidence of new disability. Objectives: 1. To determine the incidence of moderate-to-severe disability in a prospective cohort study of aging men; and 2. To determine predisposing risk factors for new moderate to severe disability. Design & Setting: The Manitoba Follow-up Study is a closed cohort study. In 1948, the initial sample was 3,983 men who qualified for air crew training in the Royal Canadian Air Force. In 2004, there were 796 men who were still alive and responded to the annual questionnaire with no missing data, and who did not have disability. The mean age at that time was 84. Methods: We calculated the incidence of new moderate-to-severe disability from 2004 to 2017, calculated the time to disability, and constructed survival analysis models to determine factors which predicted disability. Results: The incidence of disability increased with the aging of the cohort and ranged from 4% to 12% per year. In unadjusted models, poor self-rated health (SRH), low life satisfaction, a low score on the Physical Component Score (PCS) of the Short Form-36, and the number of chronic conditions were all associated with new disability. In adjusted models, SRH, the PCS, and the number of chronic conditions were associated with new disability. Conclusions: Global measures of well-being, as well as multimorbidity, predict new disability.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".