Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32547348›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of ageing2020

Longitudinal change in physical functioning and dropout due to death among the oldest old: a comparison of three methods of analysis.

Jani Raitanen, Sari Stenholm, Kristina Tiainen, Marja Jylhä, Jaakko Nevalainen

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of ageing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jani RaitanenFaculty of Social Sciences (Health Sciences), Tampere University, PO Box 100, 33014 Tampere, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-7674-0978
Sari StenholmFaculty of Social Sciences (Health Sciences), Tampere University, PO Box 100, 33014 Tampere, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-7560-0930
Kristina TiainenFaculty of Social Sciences (Health Sciences), Tampere University, PO Box 100, 33014 Tampere, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-2810-1885
Marja JylhäFaculty of Social Sciences (Health Sciences), Tampere University, PO Box 100, 33014 Tampere, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-1547-4861
Jaakko NevalainenFaculty of Social Sciences (Health Sciences), Tampere University, PO Box 100, 33014 Tampere, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-6295-0245
Tampere University · FIUniversity of Turku · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Longitudinal studies examining changes in physical functioning with advancing age among very old people are plagued by high death rates, which can lead to biased estimates. This study was conducted to analyse changes in physical functioning among the oldest old with three distinct methods which differ in how they handle dropout due to death. The sample consisted of 3992 persons aged 90 or over in the Vitality 90+ Study who were followed up on average for 2.5 years (range 0-13 years). A generalized estimating equation (GEE) with independent 'working' correlation, a linear mixed-effects (LME) model and a joint model consisting of longitudinal and survival submodels were used to estimate the effect of age on physical functioning over 13 years of follow-up. We observed significant age-related decline in physical functioning, which furthermore accelerated significantly with age. The average rate of decline differed markedly between the models: the GEE-based estimate for linear decline among survivors was about one-third of the average individual decline in the joint model and half the decline indicated by the LME model. In conclusion, the three methods yield substantially different views on decline in physical functioning: the GEE model may be useful for considering the effect of intervention measures on the outcome among living people, whereas the LME model is biased regarding studying outcomes associated with death. The joint model may be valuable for predicting the future characteristics of the oldest old and planning elderly care as life expectancy continues gradually to rise.

Indexed as

Attrition due to deathFunctioningJoint modelLongitudinal studyModel comparison

Identifiers

PMID32547348
PMCPMC7292844
OpenAlexW2974924096

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.