Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30626340›Full record

SynthesisBMC geriatrics2019

Performance-based clinical tests of balance and muscle strength used in young seniors: a systematic literature review.

Ronny Bergquist, Michaela Weber, Michael Schwenk, Synnøve Ulseth, Jorunn L Helbostad, Beatrix Vereijken, Kristin Taraldsen

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC geriatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 8 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Golf and Physical Health: A Systematic Review.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022
    Pooled it
  8. Guideline
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

7 authors.

Ronny BergquistDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian Univerity of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. ronny.bergquist@ntnu.no.
Michaela WeberNetwork Aging Research (NAR), Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Michael SchwenkNetwork Aging Research (NAR), Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Synnøve UlsethDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian Univerity of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Jorunn L HelbostadDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian Univerity of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Beatrix VereijkenDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian Univerity of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Kristin TaraldsenDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian Univerity of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany balance and strength tests exist that have been designed for older seniors, often aged ≥70 years. To guide strategies for preventing functional decline, valid and reliable tests are needed to detect early signs of functional decline in young seniors. Currently, little is known about which tests are being used in young seniors and their methodological quality. This two-step review aims to 1) identify commonly used tests of balance and strength, and 2) evaluate their measurement properties in young seniors.

methodsFirst, a systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE to identify primary studies that employed performance-based tests of balance and muscle strength, and which aspects of balance and strength these tests assess in young seniors aged 60-70. Subsequently, for tests used in ≥3 studies, a second search was performed to identify method studies evaluating their measurement properties. The quality of included method studies was evaluated using the Consensus-based Standards for selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist.

resultsOf 3454 articles identified, 295 met the inclusion criteria. For the first objective, 69 balance and 51 muscle strength tests were identified, with variations in administration mode and outcome reporting. Twenty-six balance tests and 15 muscle strength tests were used in ≥3 studies, with proactive balance tests and functional muscle power tests used most often. For the second objective, the search revealed 1880 method studies, of which nine studies (using 5 balance tests and 1 strength test) were included for quality assessment. The Timed Up and Go test was evaluated the most (4 studies), while the Community Balance and Mobility (CBM) scale was the second most assessed test (3 studies). For strength, one study assessed the reliability of the Five times sit-to-stand.

conclusionCommonly used balance and muscle strength tests in young seniors vary greatly with regards to administration mode and outcome reporting. Few studies have evaluated measurement properties of these tests when used in young seniors. There is a need for standardisation of existing tests to improve their informative value and comparability. For measuring balance, the CBM is a new and promising tool to detect even small balance deficits in balance in young seniors.

Indexed as

AgedGeriatric AssessmentHumansMaleMiddle AgedMuscle StrengthPostural BalancePsychomotor PerformanceReproducibility of ResultsTime and Motion StudiesBalanceMeasurement propertiesMuscle strengthOlder adultsPerformance-based testsSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30626340
PMCPMC6327480

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.