Factors related to frailty syndrome in the elderly with systemic arterial hypertension
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective: To determine the factors related to frailty syndrome in elderly people diagnosed with systemic arterial hypertension. Methods: This study with a quantitative and cross-sectional approach was conducted with elderly individuals aged =60 years, of both sexes and diagnosed with arterial hypertension. Sociodemographic profile, blood pressure measurements, lifestyle habits, Edmonton Frailty Scale, and Mini-Mental State Examination were assessed. Descriptive statistics, Pearson's correlation analysis, t test to compare means, and linear logistic regression were used. The significance level was p<0.05. The study was approved by the Ethics and Research Committee. Results: The 272 participants evaluated were diagnosed with systemic arterial hypertension (162), were women (119; 73.45%), most of them were aged between 60-79 years (82.1%), lived without a partner (85; 52.5%), had a mean education level of 5.14 years and morbidities of 5.18, in addition to high blood pressure. The Mini-Mental State Examination showed a positive value for cognitive deficit in individuals from the study population (96; 59.3%) and a mean frailty of 5.43 points. In the linear regression, lower education (p=0.005) and the number of morbidities (p<0.001) were the factors associated with frailty and women had a higher frailty score. Conclusion: The associated factors of sex, age, education, and multimorbidity (which directly affect frailty) lead to an increase in frailty in elderly people over time. This condition can cause a worsening of their health and the development of new comorbidities.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 it