MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417040095 · doi:10.1186/s12877-025-06620-2

Impact of frailty on balance, fall risk, and kinesiophobia in sarcopenic elderly

2025· article· en· W4417040095 on OpenAlexaffabout
Metehan Yana, Ecem Çoroğlu, Musa Güneş, Gizem Mermerkaya, Nurhayat Özkan Sevencan

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Geriatrics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsCanadian Physiotherapy Association
FundersTürkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu
KeywordsSarcopeniaFear of fallingFalling (accident)RehabilitationFalls in older adultsComorbiditySarcopenic obesityActivities of daily livingGeriatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The relationship between frailty and sarcopenia is well-known in older adults, but the factors associated with frailty were not adequately investigated. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between frailty levels and balance, fall risk, and kinesiophobia in older adults with primary sarcopenia and to compare them by sex. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 68 (32 female, mean age 71.56 ± 5.04 years; 36 male, mean age 71.97 ± 4.86 years) older adults with primary sarcopenia. Sarcopenia was assessed based on grip strength, skeletal muscle mass, and physical performance. Frailty levels (Edmonton Frailty Scale (EFS)), dynamic and static balance (Force plate), fall risk (Denn Fall Risk Assessment Scale), and kinesiophobia (Tampa Kinesiophobia Scale (TSK)) of the individuals were assessed. RESULTS: Sarcopenic females had statistically significantly higher levels of frailty, fall risk, kinesiophobia, and decreased balance stability areas than males (p < 0.05). The prevalence of frailty among older adults with sarcopenia was 51.5%, with a mean EFS score of 6.54 ± 2.51. Females had significantly higher frailty levels than males (7.53 ± 2.81 vs. 5.67 ± 1.83, p = 0.002). Fall risk was also higher in females (10.66 ± 5.83 vs. 7.17 ± 4.29, p = 0.007), as was kinesiophobia (47.59 ± 6.37 vs. 41.81 ± 5.09, p < 0.001). Frailty showed a moderate positive correlation with fall risk (r = 0.603, p < 0.001) and kinesiophobia (r = 0.510, p < 0.001), and a weak negative correlation with balance stability in the anterior direction (r=-0.249, p = 0.040) and to the right (r=-0.265, p = 0.030). CONCLUSION: Sarcopenic females have higher levels of frailty and have a higher risk of falling and kinesiophobia than males. Sarcopenic females also have more impaired balance. Increased frailty levels in older sarcopenic adults are associated with increased fear of falling and kinesiophobia, and impaired balance. Therefore, assessment of frailty and associated factors in older adults with sarcopenia is essential in planning rehabilitation.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC GeriatricsSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207