ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Assessing frailty in older adults: discriminative properties of physical activity questionnaires.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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.
- Assessment Tools, Interventions, and Biopsychosocial Factors Associated With Physical Activity in Older Adults: A Scoping Review.Nursing research and practice · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Frailty is prevalent among older adults and is a growing public health concern. Physical activity questionnaires are pragmatic tools for screening; however, their discriminative capacity remains uncertain. This study aimed to determine the discriminative performance and optimal cut-offs of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form (IPAQ-SF) and the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE) for identifying frailty states (non-frail, pre-frail, and frail) in a clinically derived cohort of older adults. Methods: The study enrolled 289 older adults who were assessed using a demographic form, the FRAIL Scale, the IPAQ-SF, and the PASE. Frailty discrimination was evaluated via receiver operating characteristic analysis (ROC); optimal thresholds were identified using the Youden index, diagnostic indices (sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, predictive values) were computed, micro-/macro- area under the curves (AUC) were reported, and scale AUCs were compared using the DeLong test. Results: Participants had a mean age of 72.5 ± 7.0 years, and 56.7% were women. Frailty prevalence was 31.1% non-frail, 29.4% pre-frail, and 39.4% frail. For IPAQ-SF, AUCs were 0.45 (non-frail), 0.40 (pre-frail), and 0.67 (frail); for PASE, AUCs were 0.39 (non-frail), 0.50 (pre-frail), and 0.65 (frail). Macro-/micro-AUCs were 0.51/0.53 for IPAQ-SF and 0.51/0.52 for PASE. No significant differences were found between the two instruments across the frailty categories (DeLong test, Conclusion: IPAQ-SF and PASE demonstrated limited ability to discriminate frailty status in older adults, with moderate accuracy in identifying frail individuals and poor discrimination between the non-frail and pre-frail groups. The IPAQ-SF showed slightly higher specificity, whereas the PASE demonstrated higher sensitivity, indicating that they capture distinct aspects of physical activity behavior but cannot be used interchangeably.
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.