MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7037034352

Descriptive Analysis of Fall-Related Injuries Among Older Adults in Ontario

2021· article· en· W7037034352 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDescriptive statisticsInjury preventionPoison controlOccupational safety and healthSuicide preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsFalling (accident)Age groups
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Falls are the leading cause of injury-related hospitalizations among older adults in Canada. The purpose of this study was to describe the characteristics of older adults who experienced fall-related injuries (FRIs) and the types of falls that caused them. We analyzed Ontario-wide secondary data from three databases (NACRS, DAD, RPDB) covering 2010-2014. Older adults (≥ 65 years) who visited emergency departments (ED) with FRIs were selected using ICD-10-CA codes for a fall and injury. Counts, measures of central tendency, and prevalence rates (crude, age- and sex-specific, age-standardized) were calculated. There were 304,610 (63.0% females) ED admissions (3,089 per 100,000 population) and 143,210 (61.2% females) hospitalizations (1,452 per 100,000 population). Rates for most injuries increased with age and were higher for females. Fractures and superficial injuries were the most common. Slips, trips, and stumbles were the most common fall types. Findings suggest that injury prevention should be targeted at females and the oldest old.

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)0.003
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)→Same topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research→French-language works237,207→