The Six-Minute Walk Test in Community-Dwelling Older Adult Women: The Influence of Physical Activity Levels and Age-Related Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: In the context of active ageing, functional assessment is key to preserving autonomy in older women. The six-minute walk test (6MWT) is a practical tool for estimating general health, but its results can be influenced by various factors. This study analysed cardiorespiratory variations during the 6MWT in older women according to their physical activity level and age-related variables such as pain, sarcopenia, frailty, and motivation to exercise. Methods: A total of 163 older women with musculoskeletal pain, but without cardiac or respiratory conditions, were classified into groups with high (HPA), moderate (MPA), and low (LPA) physical activity. During the 6MWT, heart rate (HR), dyspnoea, and oxygen saturation (SpO2) were recorded. Pain, sarcopenia, frailty, and motivation to exercise were also assessed. A repeated-measures multivariate analysis of (co)variance (RM-MANCOVA) was performed. Results: The results showed differences in HR depending on the level of physical activity, conditioned by sarcopenia (p < 0.05) and walked distance (p < 0.001), and in dyspnoea conditioned by pain perception (p < 0.01) and social (p < 0.001) and psychological (p < 0.05) motivation to exercise. There were also differences in SpO2 depending on the level of physical activity (p < 0.0001). There were differences between the HPA group and both the MPA and LPA group, which had higher HR, higher dyspnoea, and lower SpO2 when undergoing the 6MWT test. Conclusions: To accurately interpret 6MWT results in older adult women, it is essential to consider physical activity level, perceived pain, sarcopenia, and motivation to exercise, as these factors influence HR, dyspnoea, and SpO2. These variables should guide physical activity recommendations for healthy ageing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".