Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30909878›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2019

Relative importance of four functional measures as predictors of 15-year mortality in the older Dutch population.

Elisabeth M W Eekhoff, Natasja M van Schoor, Joseph S Biedermann, Mirjam M Oosterwerff, Renate de Jongh, Nathalie Bravenboer, Mireille N M van Poppel, Dorly J H Deeg

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
10.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Adolescent IQ and performance-based measures of physical function in old age: a 54-year longitudinal study.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Elisabeth M W EekhoffDepartment of Internal Medicine, Section Endocrinology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers location VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. emw.eekhoff@vumc.nl.
Natasja M van SchoorDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics/LASA, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Centers location VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081, BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Joseph S BiedermannDepartment of Internal Medicine, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Reinier de Graafweg 5, 2625 AD, Delft, The Netherlands.
Mirjam M OosterwerffDepartment of Internal Medicine, Catharina Hospital, Michelangelolaan 2, 5623 EJ, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Renate de JonghDepartment of Internal Medicine, Section Endocrinology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers location VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nathalie BravenboerDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Mireille N M van PoppelDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Centers location VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Dorly J H DeegDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics/LASA, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Centers location VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081, BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLCatharina Ziekenhuis · NLReinier de Graaf Hospital · NLUniversity of Graz · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDecreased physical function is known to raise mortality risk. Little is known about how different physical function measures compare in predicting mortality risk in older men and women. The objective of this study was to compare four, objective and self-reported, physical function measures in predicting 15-year mortality risk in older men and women.

methodsData were used from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA), an ongoing cohort study in a population-based sample of the older Dutch population, sampled from municipal records. The 1995-96 cycle, including 727 men and 778 women aged 65-88 years, was considered as the baseline. Mortality was followed up through September 1, 2011. Physical function measures were: lower-body performance (chair stands test, walk test and tandem stand); handgrip strength (grip strength dynamometer); lung function (peak expiratory flow rate); functional limitations (self-report of difficulties in performing six activities of daily living). Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine the predictive value of each physical function measure for 15-year mortality risk, adjusted for demographic, lifestyle and health variables as potential confounders.

results1031 participants (68.5%) had died. After adjustments for confounders, in models assessing single functional measures, peak flow was the strongest predictor of all-cause mortality in men (HR 1.76, CI 1.38-2.26, CI) and lower-body performance in women (HR 1.97,CI 1.40-2.76, CI). In a model including all four functional measures only peak flow was statistically significant in predicting mortality in both genders (men HR 1.54,CI 1.18-2.01 and women HR 1.45,CI 1.08-1.94). In women, lower-body performance (HR 1.66, CI 1.15-2.41) followed by grip strength (HR 1.38, CI 1.02-1.89), and in men, functional limitations (HR 1.43, CI 1.14-1.8) were the other significant predictors of all-cause mortality.

conclusionBoth objective and self-reported measures of physical functioning predicted all-cause mortality in a representative sample of the older Dutch population to different extents in men and women. Peak flow contributed important unique predictive value for mortality in both men and women. In women, however, lower-body performance tests had better predictive ability. A second-best predictor in men was self-reported functional limitations. Peak flow, and possibly one of the other measures, may be used in clinical practice for assessment in the context of time constraints.

Indexed as

Activities of Daily LivingPopulation SurveillanceSex CharacteristicsAgedAged, 80 and overCohort StudiesFemaleHand StrengthHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMortalityNetherlandsPredictive Value of TestsProportional Hazards ModelsFunctional limitationsHandgrip strengthLASALower-body performanceLung functionMortality

Identifiers

PMID30909878
PMCPMC6434808
OpenAlexW2937121907

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.