ArticleThe journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences2025
Development and validation of the mobility in middle-age questionnaire.
Article in The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences, 2025. 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.
- Associations of mobility and frailty risk with wayfinding ability in aging.Behavioral neuroscience · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a multidimensional physical function-focused frailty at risk index for early detection of functional decline in community-dwelling older adults.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The association between mobility and a cognitive measure of attention and processing speed in middle-aged adults: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMobility decline often begins in midlife, and early identification of individuals at risk of accelerated deterioration can enable timely prevention. However, there is no validated self-report instrument that specifically assesses mobility in the middle-aged population.
methodsThe Mobility in Middle-Age Questionnaire (MMQ) was developed through a 7-step Delphi process, consisting of 10 experts, involving item selection and content validation in both English and Hebrew, comprising 2 factors: (1) Current Mobility Ability and (2) 1-Year Mobility Change. Psychometric properties were assessed in 610 US and 594 Israeli middle-aged adults. Analyses included internal consistency, test-retest reliability, structural and construct validity (using the 10-item Physical Functioning scale [PF-10] from SF-36), and floor/ceiling effect assessments. A "Potential Mobility Risk Zone" was defined as the lowest 20% of MMQ scores.
resultsThe MMQ showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .94 English; .92 Hebrew) and strong test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.89-0.90). Exploratory factor analysis explained 66% of variance; confirmatory factor analysis showed good fit (Comparative Fit Index = 0.99, Tucker-Lewis Index = 0.99, Standardized Root Mean Square Residual = 0.05). Construct validity was supported, with all pre-defined hypotheses confirmed. MMQ showed significantly lower ceiling effects than PF-10 (3.9% vs. 34.5% in United States; 0.17% vs 25.25% in Israel, p < .001, large effect sizes). A score of 50 (20th percentile) was proposed as a preliminary "Potential Mobility Risk" Threshold.
conclusionsThe MMQ is a reliable and valid tool for detecting early mobility decline in midlife. Longitudinal studies are needed to confirm its predictive value and responsiveness to change.
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.