Fuerza prensil de mano y su asociación con la edad, género y dominancia de extremidad superior en adultos mayores autovalentes insertos en la comunidad: Un estudio exploratorio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hand grip strength could be influenced by gender, age and handedness. AIM: To describe differences in grip strength for age, gender and upper extremity handedness in non-disabled community-dwelling older adults. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We studied 47 males aged 72.3 ± 5.6 years and 69 females 72.4 ± 6.0 years who were divided in two age groups (65-70 and ≥ 71 years old). Grip strength was determined by a standardized protocol using a hand dynamometer. RESULTS: There was an inverse correlation between grip strength and age in both hands only among men (p ≤ 0.05). When analyzing both genders, there was a significant inverse correlation between grip strength and age only in the dominant hand (p ≤ 0.05). Strength was higher in the dominant hand in both genders (p ≤ 0.05). It was also higher in men, compared to women in the two age groups studied (p ≤ 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Grip strength is higher in men than women, it decreases with age and is higher in the dominant hand.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".