MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407622816 · doi:10.1016/j.jgo.2025.102201

Impairments in geriatric assessment and their associations with different grip strength cutoffs and components of the Short Physical Performance Battery among older adults with cancer

2025· article· en· W4407622816 on OpenAlexaff
Saul Cobbing, Shabbir M.H. Alibhai, Rana Jin, Susie Monginot, Efthymios Papadopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geriatric Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGrip strengthGerontologyBattery (electricity)Physical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical activityPhysical strengthHand strength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The grip strength test is often used during geriatric assessment (GA) to assess muscle strength in older adults. However, it is unclear which grip strength cutoffs are most relevant to older adults in the context of GA. Physical performance during GA is often assessed via the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). Whether the SPPB is superior to two of its individual components (4-m gait speed and the 5-chair stand test) for identifying GA abnormalities is unknown. The objectives of this study were (i) to identify which grip strength thresholds are associated with impairments in GA domains and with an abnormal GA overall and (ii) to examine whether total SPPB score is a stronger indicator of an abnormal GA and each of its domains than 4-m gait speed and the 5-chair stand test. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of older adults with cancer aged ≥65 years who had undergone a GA prior to treatment. Grip strength and the SPPB were completed during GA. We examined three different grip strength cutoffs: (i) European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2 (EWGSOP2); (ii) the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH); and (iii) the Sarcopenia Definitions and Outcomes Consortium (SDOC). Low SPPB was defined as a score of ≤9 out of 12 points. A score of ≤3 out of 4 points was used to identify abnormalities in the 4-m gait speed and 5-chair stand test. Multivariable logistic regression was used to address the study objectives. RESULTS: A total of 475 participants (mean age: 80.7 years, 42.9 % female) were included. The FNIH grip strength criteria had a higher discriminative ability of an abnormal GA (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.646) than the EWGSOP2 and the SDOC criteria. Compared to the SPPB and the 5-chair stand test, the 4-m gait speed was the strongest indicator of an abnormal GA (AUC = 0.737). The addition of low grip strength improved the performance of the SPPB (AUC Δ = +0.05) and gait speed (AUC Δ = +0.04) for identifying an abnormal GA. DISCUSSION: Low grip strength per the FNIH and slow gait speed are of clinical relevance during GA.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.312 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geriatric OncologySame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207