| Title |
Developing an assessment based on physical fitness age to evaluate motor function in frail and healthy elderly women
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Interventions in Aging, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cia.s146996 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Masaki Nakagaichi, Yuya Anan, Yuto Hikiji, Sou Uratani |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to identify a method for assessing physical fitness age that is easy to use with both frail and healthy elderly women and to examine its validity. Principal component analysis was used to develop a formula of physical fitness age from four motor function variables. The subjects comprised 688 (75.7±6.0 years) elderly women, in order to develop a physical fitness scale. The formula for calculating physical fitness age was expressed as physical fitness age =-0.419× grip strength -0.096× balancing on one leg with eyes open -0.737×30 s chair stand +0.503× figure-of-8 walking test +0.47× chronological age +52.68. Measures obtained from subjects in the frail elderly (n=11, 73.0±2.3 years) and exercise (n=10, 70.8±3.1 years) groups were used to examine the validity of the assessment. The mean physical fitness age of the frail elderly group (79.0±3.7 years) was significantly higher than its mean chronological age (73.0±2.3 years, p<0.05). The mean physical fitness age of the exercise group (65.6±3.1 years) was significantly lower than the chronological age (70.8±3.1 years, p<0.05). These findings confirm that physical fitness age scores are applicable to frail and healthy elderly women. Physical fitness age is a valid measure of motor function in elderly women. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 60% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 19 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 14% |
| Sports and Recreations | 5 | 11% |
| Psychology | 2 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 20 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 July 2018.
All research outputs
#7,050,597
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#661
of 1,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#131,229
of 449,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#17
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 449,550 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.