Impact of frailty on balance, fall risk, and kinesiophobia in sarcopenic elderly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".