Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39263423›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2024

Sex differences in mobility recovery after hip fracture: a time series analysis.

Carl-Philipp Jansen, Monika Engdal, Raphael S Peter, Jorunn L Helbostad, Kristin Taraldsen, Beatrix Vereijken, Klaus Pfeiffer, Clemens Becker, Jochen Klenk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Real-world walking and activity patterns in community-dwelling older adults: a cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from the SMART-AGE trial.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

9 authors.

Carl-Philipp JansenDepartment of Clinical Gerontology, Robert-Bosch-Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany.
Monika EngdalDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Raphael S PeterInstitute of Epidemiology and Medical Biometry, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
Jorunn L HelbostadDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Kristin TaraldsenDepartment of Rehabilitation Science and Health Technology, Oslo Metropolitan University (OsloMet), Oslo, Norway.
Beatrix VereijkenDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Klaus PfeifferDepartment of Clinical Gerontology, Robert-Bosch-Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany.
Clemens BeckerDepartment of Clinical Gerontology, Robert-Bosch-Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany.
Jochen KlenkDepartment of Clinical Gerontology, Robert-Bosch-Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Sex differences are commonly reported for hip fracture incidence rates and recovery. Current knowledge about mobility recovery after hip fracture involves clinical assessments of physical capacity or patient-reported outcomes. Information on mobility performance during daily life is missing but relevant to evaluate patients' recovery. Hence, it remains unclear whether sex differences exist in the longitudinal progression of mobility performance in hip fracture patients. To investigate this, we pooled data from four studies in Germany and Norway. Methods: In all studies, real-world mobility was assessed continuously over 1 to 7 days using a sensor fixed to the unaffected frontal thigh. All studies assessed mobility at different time points that were allocated to three distinct phases: Acute and post-acute phase (week 1-6), extended recovery (7-26), and long-term recovery (27-52). Sex-specific continuous trajectories of the median (50th percentile) as well as the 1st (25th percentile) and 3rd quartile (75th percentile) were estimated using quantile regression models with splines for daily walking and standing duration; number of sit-to-stand-to-walk transfers and walking bouts; mean walking bout duration; maximum number of steps per walking bout. Results: There were 5,900 valid observation days from Conclusion: We identified varying aspects of mobility recovery between men and women, i.e., timely development of mobility recovery shows different patterns. Our findings support the consideration of sex differences in planning and implementing rehabilitation measures for hip fracture patients and highlight the need to provide adapted support at different time points. The underlying mechanisms of these sex differences need further investigation.

Indexed as

Hip FracturesRecovery of FunctionAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMobility LimitationNorwaySex FactorsWalkingdigital mobility outcomeship fracturemobilityreal-world walkingsex differences

Identifiers

PMID39263423
PMCPMC11390126

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.