MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409909915 · doi:10.1590/0102-311xen041624

Exploring frailty in Brazil: an analysis of the ELSI-Brazil survey

2025· article· en· W4409909915 on OpenAlexaff
Henrique Pott, Mario Ulises Pérez‐Zepeda, Melissa K. Andrew, Kenneth Rockwood

Bibliographic record

VenueCadernos de Saúde Pública · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGerontologyFrailty IndexHealth careMedicineLogistic regressionPopulationPublic healthDemographyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Brazilian aging population will challenge publicly funded health services, on which most Brazilians rely. The country must prepare for aging-associated health challenges such as frailty. We used data from the Brazilian Longitudinal Study of Aging (ELSI-Brazil) to generate a standardized Frailty Index (FI), assess frailty levels among this population, and supply reliable and nationwide information. In total, 9,901 adults aged 50 years or older were studied in the second wave of ELSI-Brazil. A 53-item FI was created according to a standardized protocol. Logistic regression was used to determine the association between frailty levels and disability/health status, whereas the relationship between frailty level, disabilities, and healthcare use was analyzed by a negative binomial regression. Frailty was high, with a 0.19 weighted mean FI score and 0.19 median. Frailty distribution was right-skewed, with higher levels in women and increased exponentially with age. Widow(er)s, black and mixed-race individuals, and those living in rural areas had higher levels of frailty. Regression models showed that higher frailty was associated with poorer self-assessment of health, higher disability, and greater use of healthcare services. This study shows a high prevalence of frailty in Brazilian middle-aged and older adults and its association with disability, health status, and healthcare service use. These relevant findings can inform healthcare policies and design services prioritizing this population's health, particularly for those using public healthcare.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.719

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.107
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.250 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCadernos de Saúde PúblicaSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207