MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322768485 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igad019

Testing the Webber’s Comprehensive Mobility Framework Using Self-Reported and Performance-Based Mobility Outcomes Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults in Nigeria

2023· article· en· W4322768485 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFear of fallingBalance (ability)StairsPsychologyGaitRegression analysisPreferred walking speedGerontologyClimbPersonal mobilityMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPoison controlInjury preventionGeographyEnvironmental healthStatisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background and Objectives In 2010, Webber and colleagues conceptualized the interrelationships between mobility determinants, and researchers tested Webber’s framework using data from developed countries. No studies have tested this model using data from developing nations (e.g., Nigeria). This study aimed to simultaneously explore the cognitive, environmental, financial, personal, physical, psychological, and social influences and their interaction effects on the mobility outcomes among community-dwelling older adults in Nigeria. Research Design and Methods This cross-sectional study recruited 227 older adults (mean age [standard deviation] = 66.6 [6.8] years). Performance-based mobility outcomes included gait speed, balance, and lower extremity strength, and were assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery, whereas the self-reported mobility outcomes included inability to walk 0.5 km, 2 km, or climb a flight of stairs, assessed using the Manty Preclinical Mobility Limitation Scale. Regression analysis was used to determine the predictors of mobility outcomes. Results The number of comorbidities (physical factor) negatively predicted all mobility outcomes, except the lower extremity strength. Age (personal factor) negatively predicted gait speed (β = −0.192), balance (β = −0.515), and lower extremity strength (β = −0.225), and a history of no exercise (physical factor) positively predicted inability to walk 0.5 km (B = 1.401), 2 km (B = 1.295). Interactions between determinants improved the model, explaining the most variations in all the mobility outcomes. Living arrangement is the only factor that consistently interacted with other variables to improve the regression model for all mobility outcomes, except balance and self-reported inability to walk 2 km. Discussion and Implications Interactions between determinants explain the most variations in all mobility outcomes, highlighting the complexity of mobility. This finding highlighted that factors predicting self-reported and performance-based mobility outcomes might differ, but this should be confirmed with a large data set.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.286 · 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