ArticleAustralasian journal on ageing2025
Sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit kinematics in older adults with and without functional disability: A principal component analysis.
Article in Australasian journal on ageing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit kinematics in older adults with and without functional disability: A principal component analysis.Australasian journal on ageing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveSit-to-Stand (Sit-TS) and Stand-to-Sit (Stand-TS) transitions are essential daily movements affected by ageing and disability. This study aimed to explore related kinematic domains in older adults with and without disability.
methodsA cross-sectional study including adults aged 60 years or older, with (n = 25) and without disability (n = 35). Comparisons between groups included task time, centre of mass (CoM) acceleration, postural sway and principal component (PC) scores for each task. Principal component models (PCMs) included lower limb and trunk tridimensional joint ranges of motion, angular velocity range, CoM displacement and velocity along each Sit-TS (flexion, momentum transfer, extension and stabilisation) and Stand-TS (initiation, flexion, momentum transfer and extension) phases.
resultsOlder adults with functional disability exhibited increased Sit-TS peak antero-posterior CoM acceleration (p = .02). The Sit-TS and Stand-TS PCMs included nine PCs each. In Sit-TS, the first three explained half the variance: PC1 captured transverse hip and knee stabilisation kinematics, PC2 described trunk and hip frontal and transverse control during flexion, and PC3 represented sagittal knee and ankle control during momentum transfer and extension. In Stand-TS, variance was more distributed (PC1 describing frontal hip and knee flexion velocity, PC2 sagittal trunk and hip extension velocity, and PC3 vertical CoM velocity at extension). Significant group differences emerged in PC4 (transverse knee and frontal hip kinematics) and PC9 (sagittal and frontal trunk angular velocity ranges during momentum transfer).
conclusionsBoth transitions revealed distinct joint and trunk control demands. Principal components involving transverse knee, frontal hip and trunk angular velocities distinguished disability groups, with Stand-TS showing greater discriminative power.
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.