MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132955114

Psychological and psychiatric aspects of the fear of falling in the elderly

2003· dissertation· W7132955114 on OpenAlexafffund
Nadine Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2003
Typedissertation
Language
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsBibliographical Society of Canada
FundersToronto Rehabilitation Institute
KeywordsDysfunctional familyFear of fallingAnxietyDepression (economics)Falling (accident)Depressive symptomsPoison control
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. To date, studies of fear of falling have focused on sociodemographic, physical and functional correlates. Objective. To determine whether depression, anxiety, and dysfunctional attitudes relate independently to fear of falling. Methods. A cross-sectional study of 105 inpatients 60 years or older who experienced at least one fall in the previous year was performed. Psychological variables were assessed using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the Dysfunctional Attitude Scale. Additional variables previously found to be associated with fear of falling were also measured. Results. Depressive disorders, depression severity, anxiety disorders, anxiety severity, and dysfunctional attitudes each related independently to fear of falling as measured both continuously and categorically. Depressive disorders and depression severity had the strongest association with fear of falling. Conclusion. Fear of falling has important psychological correlates. Increased understanding of these correlates could lead to more effective prevention and treatment.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.377 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→