Preoperative frailty and postoperative neurocognitive disorders in older adults in Georgia: study protocol for a prospective, observational cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In high-income countries, the prevalence of frailty ranges from 10% to 37%. However, data from low- and middle-income countries remain largely unavailable, and no information is currently available on the prevalence of frailty or cognitive impairment in the Georgian population. Preoperative frailty is a known risk factor for postoperative delirium and neurocognitive disorders, which can be life-threatening in the population of older adults. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol describes a prospective, single-centre observational cohort study investigating preoperative frailty and postoperative neurocognitive disorders in older adults presenting for surgery in Georgia. The study will include 230 participants. Patients will be enroled after their cognitive health is evaluated using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test. Frailty and neuropsychological tests are conducted at baseline, discharge, 30 days, 3 months and 12 months postoperatively. Additionally, IL-6 levels are measured in blood samples to assess systemic inflammatory levels preoperatively. Participants will be followed up for 1 year. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Our trial has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the LTD 'New Hospitals' clinic (Approval No. 23/01). Patient recruitment began in April 2023 in Tbilisi, Georgia, and will continue until 2026. Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, publication in peer-reviewed journals, engagement with stakeholders and outreach through popular media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06700291.
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 | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.004 |
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".