MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405898188 · doi:10.61415/riage.297

Associação entre faixa etária e avaliação multidimensional da pessoa idosa residente do município de araras/são paulo/brasil

2024· article· en· W4405898188 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luciane da Costa Araújo, Pedro Juliano Pumarega Silva, Higor Matheus de Oliveira Bueno

Bibliographic record

VenueRIAGE - Revista Ibero-Americana de Gerontologia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Nursing, Elderly Care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhysicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of age on the multidimensional assessment of elderly persons in Araras/SP/Brazil. METHOD: Multicenter, analytical and quantitative study carried out in Araras/São Paulo/Brazil with elderly people aged 60 years or over and with the cognitive capacity to answer the questionnaire. The scales applied were: Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), Edmonton Frailty (EFE), Lawton and Brody and Vulnerable Elders Survey - 13 (VES-13), The data were categorized and verified in SPSS (version 23) in a descriptive and inferential (Chi Square; p-value<0.05). Approved by the Ethics and Research Committee (Protocol nº 4,393,230). RESULTS: Sample of 185 elderly people, of which 52.43% were young elderly, 32.43% were moderately elderly and 15.14% were considered elderly. Of the total, 68.10% have some cognitive deficit and of the oldest old, 85.71% have some cognitive deficit; 62.16% have some level of fragility, 57.30% are not vulnerable and 60.54% have some degree of dependence. When analyzing the total number of long-lived elderly people, 75.00% are considered vulnerable. There was a significant association between age group and cognition, frailty, vulnerability and dependence (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: In the sample, it is possible to observe a significant relationship in relation to age range and multidimensional assessment of the elderly, especially in the oldest old. It can be inferred that with advancing age, the individual tends to be susceptible to problems and, therefore, it is important to individualize care and establish decent health conditions, to promote active aging, better quality of life and biopsychosocial well-being.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRIAGE - Revista Ibero-Americana de GerontologiaSame topicHealth, Nursing, Elderly CareFrench-language works237,207