Objective measures of physical performance associated with depression and/or anxiety in midlife Singaporean women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify correlates of depression and anxiety in midlife Asian women, with a special focus on the potential role of objectively measured physical performance. METHODS: Sociodemographic characteristics, reproductive health, menopause status, medical history, lifestyle choices, physical activity, and physical performance of healthy women aged 45 to 69 attending routine gynecologic care were collected. Depressive symptoms were assessed utilizing the Center for Epidemiologic Studies for Depression Scale (CES-D) and anxiety symptoms by the General Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7). Upper body physical performance was assessed by handgrip strength, and lower body physical performance was assessed by the Short Physical Performance Battery. Chi-square tests and multivariable models were used to assess the crude and adjusted associations, respectively, between the studied risk factors and depression and/or anxiety. The main outcome measures were elevated depressive symptoms ≥16 on the CES-D, and/or elevated anxiety symptoms >10 on the GAD-7 score. RESULTS: Of 1,159 women (mean age 56.3 ± 6.2), 181 (15.9%) were identified as having depressive and/or anxiety symptoms. Weak upper body (handgrip strength) and poor lower body strength (longer duration to complete the repeated chair stand test) were associated with elevated depressive and/or anxiety symptoms (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.68; 95% CI, 1.18-2.40) and (aOR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.09-1.63), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Weak upper and lower body physical performances were associated with depressive and anxiety symptoms in midlife Singaporean women. Future trials are required to determine whether strengthening exercises that improve physical performance could help reduce depressive and anxiety symptoms in midlife women. : Video Summary: Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/MENO/A419.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".