ArticleAging clinical and experimental research2023
Examining the role of different weakness categories for mobility and future falls in older Americans.
Article in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of an Innovative Leg Support Ring for Lower Limb Muscle Rehabilitation Among Older Adults in Eastern Thailand: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2026Trial
- Baseline Oral Microbiota Richness Is Associated with Training-Induced Improvements in Relative Handgrip Strength in Older Adults.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Weakness Thresholds Are Differentially Linked to Cognitive Function by Obesity Status in Older Americans.Journal of Alzheimer's disease reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecently developed absolute and body size normalized handgrip strength (HGS) cut-points could be used individually and collectively to predict mobility problems and falls.
aimsWe examined the associations of (1) each absolute and normalized weakness cut-point, (2) collective weakness categories, and (3) changes in weakness status on future falls in older Americans.
methodsThe analytic sample included 11,675 participants from the 2006-2018 waves of the Health and Retirement Study. Falls were self-reported. Men were classified as weak if their HGS was < 35.5-kg (absolute), < 0.45 kg/kg (body mass normalized), or < 1.05 kg/kg/m
resultsOlder Americans below each absolute and normalized cut-point had greater odds for future falls: 1.23 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.15-1.32) for absolute weakness, 1.20 (CI 1.11-1.29) for body mass index normalized weakness, and 1.26 (CI 1.17-1.34) for body mass normalized weakness. Persons below 1, 2, or all 3 weakness cut-points had 1.17 (CI 1.07-1.27), 1.29 (CI 1.18-1.40), and 1.36 (CI 1.24-1.48) greater odds for future falls, respectively. Those in some changing weakness categories had greater odds for future falls: 1.26 (CI 1.08-1.48) for persistent and 1.31 (CI 1.11-1.55) for progressive. DISCUSSION: Collectively using these weakness cut-points may improve their predictive value.
conclusionWe recommend HGS be evaluated in mobility and fall risk assessments.
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.