Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27760234›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2016

Limitations in Activities of Daily Living in Community-Dwelling People Aged 75 and Over: A Systematic Literature Review of Risk and Protective Factors.

Anne van der Vorst, G A Rixt Zijlstra, Nico De Witte, Daan Duppen, Andreas E Stuck, Gertrudis I J M Kempen, Jos M G A Schols, D-SCOPE Consortium

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 62 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

62 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. The crossroads between osteosarcopenia and intrinsic capacity-a narrative review.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2026
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Anne van der VorstDepartment of Health Services Research, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8235-6662
G A Rixt ZijlstraDepartment of Health Services Research, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Nico De WitteFaculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Daan DuppenFaculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Andreas E StuckDepartment of Geriatrics, University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Gertrudis I J M KempenDepartment of Health Services Research, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Jos M G A ScholsDepartment of Health Services Research, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
D-SCOPE Consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost older people wish to age in place, for which functional status or being able to perform activities of daily living (ADLs) is an important precondition. However, along with the substantial growth of the (oldest) old, the number of people who develop limitations in ADLs or have functional decline dramatically increases in this part of the population. Therefore, it is important to gain insight into factors that can contribute to developing intervention strategies at older ages. As a first step, this systematic review was conducted to identify risk and protective factors as predictors for developing limitations in ADLs in community-dwelling people aged 75 and over.

methodsFour electronic databases (CINAHL (EBSCO), EMBASE, PsycINFO and PubMed) were searched systematically for potentially relevant studies published between January 1998 and March 2016.

resultsAfter a careful selection process, 6,910 studies were identified and 25 were included. By far most factors were examined in one study only, and most were considered risk factors. Several factors do not seem to be able to predict the development of limitations in ADLs in people aged 75 years and over, and for some factors ambiguous associations were found. The following risk factors were found in at least two studies: higher age, female gender, diabetes, hypertension, and stroke. A high level of physical activity and being married were protective in multiple studies. Notwithstanding the fact that research in people aged 65 years and over is more extensive, risk and protective factors seem to differ between the 'younger' and 'older' olds.

conclusionOnly a few risk and protective factors in community-dwelling people aged 75 years and over have been analysed in multiple studies. However, the identified factors could serve both detection and prevention purposes, and implications for future research are given as well.

Indexed as

Activities of Daily LivingAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansIndependent LivingMaleProtective FactorsRisk FactorsSocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID27760234
PMCPMC5070862

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.