Printed in U.S.A Incidence of Functional Decline and Improvement in a Community-dwelling, Very Elderly Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the aging of the population, functional decline is one of the major challenges to health care systems. The objective of this study was to estimate the incidence of functional decline and improvement in a community-dwelling population of people aged 75 years and above. A representative sample of elderly people living at home in the city of Sherbrooke (Quebec, Canada) was assessed yearly on three occasions (1991-1993) by a nurse. Disabilities were measured by the Functional Autonomy Measurement System, a 29-item rating scale developed according to the World Health Organization classification of disabilities. From the 655 subjects who agreed to participate, a total of 572 subjects completed the study, including 68 who subse-quently died. The probability of declining was 20.1 % for the first year and 12.4 % for the second year. The incidence of functional decline among previously stable subjects was 11.9 % (95 % confidence interval (Cl) 8.9-15.9). Age was strongly related to decline (relative risk (RR) = 1.15/year, 95 % Cl 1.09-1.21), but there was no significant sex effect (RRma!e = 0.88, 95 % Cl 0.55-1.39). The incidence of improvement among previously disabled subjects was estimated at 7.5 % (95 % Cl 5.1-10.9) for the first year and 17.9 % (95 % Cl 14.0-23.0) for the second year. Neither age (RR = 1.07, 95 % Cl 0.99-1.15) nor sex (RRmaie = 1-70, 95 % Cl 0.90-3.18) was significantly associated with the probability of improving. This study stresses the importance of precise measurement of disabilities and the complex and dynamic process of functional transitions. Am J Epidemiol
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.445 | 0.224 |
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".