Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39675361›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Public health2025

Demographic, socioeconomic, and social barriers to use of mobility assistive products: a multistate analysis of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing.

Jamie Danemayer, Mikaela Bloomberg, Adam Mills, Cathy Holloway, Shereen Hussein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Jamie DanemayerGlobal Disability Innovation Hub, Department of Computer Science, University College London, London, UK. Electronic address: jamie.danemayer.21@ucl.ac.uk.
Mikaela BloombergDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK.
Adam MillsInstitute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Kings College London, London, UK.
Cathy HollowayGlobal Disability Innovation Hub, Department of Computer Science, University College London, London, UK.
Shereen HusseinDepartment of Health and Social Care Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

Project-001R01AG017644 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF LONDON INST OF NEUROLOGY · PI Andrew Steptoe · 2000 to 2026
$56.2M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG017644
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCross-sectional evidence suggests that access to essential mobility assistive products (MAPs) might be dependent on non-clinical factors. However, MAP use is better understood as a dynamic process wherein individuals pass through different states of MAP need and use. We aimed to test associations of demographic, socioeconomic, and social factors with transitions between MAP need and use states.

methodsFor this multistate modelling study, data were drawn from 13 years (May, 2006, to July, 2019) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, a prospective cohort study. We included respondents aged 50-89 years who participated in at least two waves of data collection. We used multistate models to examine associations of demographic, socioeconomic, and social factors, including age, sex, education, employment, wealth, marital status, and help with activities of daily living (ADL), with transitions between three main states: no need for MAPs, unmet need for MAPs, and use of MAPs.

findingsWe used data collected from 12 080 respondents (6586 women and 5494 men). During follow-up, 5102 (42·2%) of participants had unmet MAP need and 3330 (27·6%) used MAPs. Women were more likely than men to transition from no need to unmet need (hazard ratio [HR] 1·49, 95% CI 1·38-1·60) and less likely to transition from unmet need to use (0·79, 0·72-0·86). We found an increase in risk of transitioning from no need to unmet need for each 1-year increase in age (1·06, 1·06-1·07), for those with low education level (1·34, 1·23-1·45), those with help with ADL (1·32, 1·16-1·49), and who were not employed (1·22, 1·07-1·40) or disabled (3·83, 2·98-4·93). Similarly, we found an increase in risk of transitioning unmet need to use for each 1-year increase in age (1·06, 1·05-1·06), for those with low education level (1·20, 1·10-1·31), and those with help with ADL (1·25, 1·13-1·38). Increasing wealth was associated with a reduced risk of transitioning from no need to unmet need (0·78, 0·74-0·81) and from unmet need to use (0·94, 0·89-0·99). Single people were more likely to transition from unmet need to use than partnered people (HR 1·21, 95% CI 1·10-1·33).

interpretationWomen might be disproportionately likely to have unmet MAP needs, whereas other demographic, socioeconomic, and social factors are associated with high MAP need overall. Our findings directly support efforts towards expanding access to assistive products and identifying groups that could particularly benefit. As the first study of its kind to our knowledge, replication with other longitudinal datasets is needed.

fundingUK Aid.

Indexed as

Self-Help DevicesSocioeconomic FactorsActivities of Daily LivingAgedAged, 80 and overEnglandFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedMobility LimitationProspective StudiesSociodemographic Factors

Identifiers

PMID39675361
PMCPMC11973444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.