MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117803389 · doi:10.1016/j.jarlif.2025.100033

Implementation and validation of the WHO ICOPE framework in Andorra: a nationwide pilot study

2025· article· en· W7117803389 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eva Heras, Jan Missé, Encarnació Ulloa, Gemma Ballester, Maria Anglada, Oliver Valero

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aging Research and Lifestyle · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShandong Academy of Agricultural Sciences
KeywordsValue (mathematics)ScalabilityScale (ratio)Component (thermodynamics)EmbeddingWork (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Healthy ageing relies on preserving intrinsic capacity (IC), the combination of an individual's physical and mental capacities. The World Health Organization (WHO) developed the Integrated Care for Older People (ICOPE) framework as a person-centred care pathway to identify declines in IC and link older adults to appropriate interventions. The ICOPE model outlines a four-step approach involving basic community-based assessment, in-depth clinical evaluation, personalized care planning, and regular monitoring. However, evidence on large-scale implementation of this framework remains limited. Objective: To assess the feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of Step 1 screening across all seven municipalities of Andorra, and to link individuals to tailored interventions. Methods: From 2020 to 2025, 874 community-dwelling adults ≥ 60 years underwent Step 1 screening followed by full Step 2 assessment, using instruments from the WHO ICOPE Handbook.Local adaptations included a clock-drawing test, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Body Mass Index (BMI), and frequency-based scoring of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Diagnostic metrics (sensitivity, specificity, and Cohen's kappa [κ]) were calculated for each domain. Referrals and interventions were tracked. Results: Of 857 participants analysed, Step 2 showed the highest prevalence of impairment in hearing (55 %) and cognition (39 %). Step 1 sensitivity improved notably after adaptations: cognition (+12 percentage points), mood (+30 percentage points), and nutrition (+6 percentage points), with vision specificity rising from 17 % to 99.5 %. Overall, 1 182 referrals were generated; 8 % joined a 12-week multicomponent programme including physical activity, nutrition and psychosocial support. Conclusion: The ICOPE model is feasible at national scale. Local adaptations significantly enhanced screening accuracy without added burden. The Andorran experience offers a scalable and replicable model for other countries or regions and highlights the value of embedding healthy ageing in community care.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
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 score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.378 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aging Research and LifestyleSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207