ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Comparison of Two Electronic Physical Performance Batteries by Measurement Time and Sarcopenia Classification.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of Frailty in Community-Dwelling Older Adults Using Smartphone-Based Digital Lifelogging: A Multi-Center, Prospective Observational Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Observational
- Vitamin D and Sarcopenia: Implications for Muscle Health.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Unsupervised Frailty Intervention by Digitalized Exercise Coaching: A Feasibility Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Validation of a Multi-Sensor-Based Kiosk in the Use of the Short Physical Performance Battery in Older Adults Attending a Fall and Balance Clinic.Annals of geriatric medicine and research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) is a widely accepted test for measuring lower extremity function in older adults. However, there are concerns regarding the examination time required to conduct a complete SPPB consisting of three components (walking speed, chair rise, and standing balance tests) in clinical settings. We aimed to assess specific examination times for each component of the electronic Short Physical Performance Battery (eSPPB) and compare the ability of the original three-component examinations (eSPPB) and a faster, two-component examination without a balance test (electronic Quick Physical Performance Battery, eQPPB) to classify sarcopenia. The study was a retrospective, cross-sectional study which included 124 ambulatory outpatients who underwent physical performance examination at a geriatric clinic of a tertiary, academic hospital in Seoul, Korea, between December 2020 and March 2021. For eSPPB, we used a toolkit containing sensors and software (Dyphi, Daejeon, Korea) developed to measure standing balance, walking speed, and chair rise test results. Component-specific time stamps were used to log the raw data. Duration of balance examination, 5 times sit-to-stand test (5XSST), and walking speed examination were calculated. Sarcopenia was determined using the 2019 Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia (AWGS) guideline. The median age was 78 years (interquartile range, IQR: 73,82) and 77 subjects (62.1%) were female. The total mean eSPPB test time was 124.8 ± 29.0 s (balance test time 61.8 ± 12.3 s, 49.5%; gait speed test time 34.3 ± 11.9 s, 27.5%; and 5XSST time 28.7 ± 19.1 s, 23.0%). The total mean eQPPB test time was 63.0 ± 25.4 s. Based on the AWGS criteria, 34 (27.4%) patient's results were consistent with sarcopenia. C-statistics for classifying sarcopenia were 0.83 for eSPPB and 0.85 for eQPPB (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.