ArticleAging clinical and experimental research2025
Understanding hand grip measures in geriatric inpatients: associations with frailty, daily functioning and fatigue.
Article in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHand grip measures are promising candidate markers for recovery in geriatric patients.
aimsTo advance interpretation of these measures, we examined: (1) the associations between grip measures at admission and measures of frailty, daily functioning and fatigue to understand the constructs they measure; (2) alternate operational definitions of grip measures.
methods181 geriatric inpatients completed twice daily grip measurements using the Eforto
resultsAssociations approached statistical significance for baseline GSmax and the outcomes frailty (B=-0.09, 99%CI=--0.21, 0.02), functional limitations (B=-0.10, 99%CI=-0.20, 0) and physical fatigue (B=-0.07, 99%CI=-0.14, 0). Baseline, average and standard deviation values for FR, GW and CPV showed trends towards associations with functional limitations, but not with frailty or fatigue.
conclusionsGSmax and CPV constructs overlapped more strongly with the construct of frailty than FR and GW. FR, GW and CPV overlapped with functional limitations, supporting their potential as early markers of recovery. Average values are more reliable than single values and variance measures may add additional information.
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.