Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30191453›Full record

SynthesisAging clinical and experimental research2019

Activities of daily living in older community-dwelling persons: a systematic review of psychometric properties of instruments.

Marijke Hopman-Rock, Helmi van Hirtum, Paul de Vreede, Ellen Freiberger

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

68 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. A brief novel questionnaire to estimate premorbid functional state in acute stroke patients.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Marijke Hopman-RockResearch center Body@Work TNO (Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research) and VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechhorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Leiden/Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.hopman@vumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6373-4560
Helmi van HirtumResearch center Body@Work TNO (Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research) and VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechhorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Leiden/Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Paul de VreedeDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Ellen FreibergerInstitute for Biomedicine of Aging, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Kobergerstr. 60, 90408, Nuremberg, Germany. ellen.freiberger@fau.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundActivities of daily living (ADL) are often used as predictors of health and function in older persons. This systematic review is part of a series initiated by the European Network for Action on Ageing and Physical Activity (EUNAAPA).

aimTo assess psychometric properties of ADL instruments for use in older populations.

methodsElectronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, AMED, Psycinfo, CINAHL) were searched, using MeSH terms and relevant keywords. Studies, published in English, were included if they evaluated one or more psychometric properties of ADL instruments in community-dwelling older persons aged 60 years and older. Combination scales with IADL were excluded. This systematic review adhered to a pre-specified protocol regarding reliability, validity, and responsiveness.

resultsIn total, 140 articles describing more than 50 different ADL instruments were included. Ten instruments which were applied in minimally three different articles of good quality (clear descriptions and adequate design according to the protocol), were evaluated for reliability, validity and responsiveness; each received a summary score. The four instruments with the highest scores were the Functional Autonomy Measurement System (SMAF), 5-items Katz list (although content and wording are often inconsistent across studies), Functional Independence and Difficulty Scale (FIDS) and the Barthel Index. DISCUSSION: Critical reflection is essential to avoid unnecessary modifications and use of instruments that have not been documented to be valid or reliable.

conclusionBased on this systematic review, we recommend the SMAF, 5-item Katz, FIDS and Barthel index as ADL measures for research and care practice in older populations.

Indexed as

Activities of Daily LivingIndependent LivingAgedAged, 80 and overGeriatric AssessmentHumansMiddle AgedPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsActivities of daily livingAgingAssessmentCommunity dwellingFunctionHealth status

Identifiers

PMID30191453
PMCPMC6589141

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.