Mobility performance among community-dwelling older Filipinos who lived in urban and rural settings: A preliminary study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The impact of residential setting on the performance of older adults on commonly used instruments of mobility has not been closely investigated. Objective: This study aimed to (1) explore whether mobility test performance differed between those who lived in urban and rural communities, and (2) report preliminary reference values for these tests according to residential setting. Methods: The study used a descriptive design. Individuals who were aged 60 years and above, had no significant disability, and resided in urban and rural areas in the Philippines ([Formula: see text]), participated in the study. Researchers measured mobility performance using the 10-Meter Walk Test (10MWT) (both comfortable gait velocity (CGV) and fast gait velocity (FGV)), Five Times Sit to Stand Test (FTSST), and Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Preliminary reference values for the mobility tests were presented as means, standard deviations, and 95% confidence intervals. Scores were compared based on residential setting (urban versus rural). Results: Urban-dwellers scored consistently better compared to their rural counterparts on the CGV, FGV, FTSST, and 6MWT using independent samples [Formula: see text]-test ([Formula: see text]). Data were further divided according to age and sex, and comparison of the mobility test scores between urban- and rural-dwellers within each subgroup showed similar differences ([Formula: see text]). Conclusion: Results provide preliminary evidence for the influence of residential setting on the mobility test performance of Filipino older adults. The study provides a good starting point for confirmatory research with a representative sample to (1) illustrate differences in mobility performance according to residential setting, (2) investigate how specific factors associated with residential settings contribute to differences in mobility performance, and (3) determine the extent to which clinicians should consider an older person’s residential setting when interpreting mobility test results.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".