MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033245233

Profile of elderly people hospitalized in general intensive care units in Rio Grande, southern Brazil: results of a cross-sectional survey

2012· article· en· W7033245233 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAmericanae (AECID Library) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusQuarter (Canadian coin)Elderly peopleIntensive carePopulationHealth careMechanical ventilationDemographic profilePublic healthElderly care
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the end of the first quarter of this century, Brazil will have the sixth largest population for people aged 60 years or more worldwide. This will increase the demands on health services for this sector. This study aimed at assessing the profile of patients in this age group who were admitted to intensive care units (ICU) in the city of Rio Grande, Southern Brazil. A cross-sectional survey was carried out between April/2007 and March/2008 in the two local hospitals. Family members answered a standardized questionnaire that collected data about demographic and socioeconomic characte- ristics, household conditions, use of health services and current clinical conditions. Among the 213 elderly people included in this study, 90% came from Rio Grande, were married, aged 70 years or more, had at least five years of schooling, earned two or more minimum wages, were owners of their hou- se and did not have private health insuran- ce; 88% had a medical appointment in the previous six months and 56% were admitted to a hospital in the previous 12 months; half of them were unconscious when they were admitted in the ICU; three quarters of them needed mechanical ventilation and 45% died within the first eight days after hospital admission. This study identified some socioeconomic and environmental characteristics and health care needed by elderly people admitted to the ICU. This information can be used to set up preventive programs and to promote adequate clinical management among this population.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmericanae (AECID Library)Same topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207