THE INTRINSIC CAPACITY PROFILE OF THE CHINESE OLDER ADULTS IN HONG KONG
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Intrinsic capacity (IC) refers to the composite of physical and mental capacity. To promote healthy ageing, the identification of IC will provide a clear picture of older adults. The IC assessment in “Pathway to Healthy Ageing Project” in Hong Kong was then conducted under the Integrated Care of Older People (ICOPE) framework. The 6 IC domains (cognition, locomotion, vitality, psychology, vision, and hearing) were assessed among the 4418 older adults recruited over Hong Kong (mean age: 74.4 years). Cognitive function was tested by Montreal cognitive assessment 5-min protocol. 16.6% of the participants had cognitive impairment. For locomotion, Short physical performance battery and Timed-Up and Go Test (TUG) were used to measure physical function and mobility. 35.0% were found to have impaired physical function, and 16.9% faced a fall risk. TUG revealed 6.5% of our participants had problem in mobility. Vitality was measured by Mini nutritional assessment and handgrip strength. Our results indicated that 27% of the participants had a malnutrition risk, and 0.4% were malnutrition. Handgrip strength indicated 59.4% had low muscle strength. Psychology was measured by Geriatric Depression Scale-15 item for depression. 10.8% of the participants were found with depression. Sensory was measured by self-reported. 22% reported they had visual loss, and 17.4% reported they had hearing loss. Our study provided a profile of IC of the community-dwelling older adults in Hong Kong. The IC impairment of Hong Kong older adults was identified, thus more targeted intervention can be provided to improve the overall health condition.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".