Multimorbidity patterns and function among adults in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To map the scope of available evidence on relationships between multimorbidity patterns and functioning among adults in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and describe methods used. DESIGN: Scoping review guided by a five-step methodological framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews reporting guidelines. DATA SOURCES: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, EBSCOhost (CINAHL) and Cochrane databases were searched from January 1976 to March 2023, plus reference lists of included studies. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Peer-reviewed full-text articles or conference proceedings of any design, published in English or Afrikaans, involving adults (>18 years) with multimorbidity living in LMICs. Studies had to refer to associations between multimorbid patterns of co-occurrence and functioning. Multimorbidity was defined as the coexistence of ≥2 diseases, including any combination of non-communicable, infectious and mental health conditions. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted independently by two reviewers using a piloted form. Findings were synthesised according to methodological approaches, multimorbidity-pattern epidemiology, evidence gaps/limitations and recommendations for future research. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health framework was used to classify functional problems. RESULTS: Nine studies (total sample size: 62 003) were included, mainly from upper-middle-income Asian countries. Key methodological inconsistencies were identified in defining and operationalising multimorbidity, conditions included in determining patterns, statistical methods for pattern determination and functioning outcome measures. Five main multimorbidity pattern domains emerged: Cardio-Metabolic and Coronary Atherosclerotic, Musculoskeletal, Respiratory and Digestive/Visceral, Degenerative, and Mental Health-Related. Mobility limitations, instrumental activities of daily living, self-care and bowel/bladder problems were consistently linked to all pattern domains. CONCLUSIONS: The limited and geographically skewed body of literature, along with methodological inconsistencies, hampers a comprehensive understanding of multimorbidity patterns and associations with functioning in LMICs. Future research should explore context-specific multimorbidity definitions, employ transparent methodologies, use standardised measures and incorporate diverse samples to inform tailored interventions and policies.
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 | 0.028 | 0.106 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.030 | 0.027 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".