MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366463665 · doi:10.1093/ageing/afad054

Normative values for grip strength, gait speed, timed up and go, single leg balance, and chair rise derived from the Canadian longitudinal study on ageing

2023· article· en· W4366463665 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alexandra Mayhew, Hon Yiu So, Jinhui Ma, Marla Beauchamp, Lauren E. Griffith, Ayse Kuspinar, Justin J. Lang, Parminder Raina

Bibliographic record

VenueAge and Ageing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of CanadaUniversity of OttawaMcMaster UniversityImpact
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNormativePercentileGrip strengthMedicineBalance (ability)GerontologyPsychological interventionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPopulationPreferred walking speedGaitLongitudinal studyHand strengthTimed Up and Go testActivities of daily livingPhysical therapyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: decreased muscle strength and physical function often precede disability, nursing home admission, home care use and mortality in older adults. Normative values for commonly used physical performance-based tests are not widely available for older adults but are required for clinicians and researchers to easily identify individuals with low performance. OBJECTIVE: to develop normative values for grip strength, gait speed, timed up and go, single-leg balance and five-repetition chair rise tests in a large population-based sample of Canadians aged 45-85 years. METHODS: baseline data (2011-2015) from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Ageing was used to estimate age- and sex-specific normative values for each of the physical tests. Participants were without disability or mobility limitation (no assistance with activities of daily living or use of mobility devices). RESULTS: of the 25,470 participants eligible for the analyses 48.6% (n = 12,369) were female with a mean age of 58.6 ± 9.5 years. Sex-specific 5th, 10th, 20th, 50th, 80th, 90th and 95th percentile values for each physical performance-based test were estimated. Cross-validation (n = 100 repetitions) with a 30% holdout sample was used to evaluate model fit. CONCLUSIONS: the normative values developed in this paper can be used in clinical and research settings to identify individuals with low performance relative to their peers of the same age and sex. Interventions targeting these at-risk individuals including physical activity can prevent or delay mobility disability and the resulting cascade of increasing care requirements, health care costs and mortality.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.304
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAge and AgeingSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207