ArticleDigital health
Development and evaluation of a digitally based functional fitness self-assessment and monitoring tool for older adults.
Article in Digital health. 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
Background: Maintaining physical function is central to healthy ageing and is emphasised in health policy aimed at shifting care from treatment to prevention. However, accessible tools that support routine monitoring of functional fitness remain limited despite evidence demonstrating links to adverse health outcomes. A Functional Fitness Monitoring Tool (FFMT) was developed as a digital, self-administered platform enabling older adults and healthcare professionals to assess and track physical function. The study aimed to; 1) evaluate perceived importance and usability; 2) compare between-session reliability of self-administered (SL) versus instructor-administered (IL) assessments. Method: Thirty-three community-dwelling older adults (68 ± 6 years) completed three SL assessments followed by two IL assessments, or vice versa. The FFMT incorporated nine validated functional tests with digital instructions, demonstration videos, and a results-monitoring interface. After all assessments, participants completed an online usability survey. Results: Between-session reliability across SL and IL assessments was good to excellent (ICC > 0. 816). Reliability remained across groups, though wider confidence intervals appeared for initial SL trials in some tests. Thresholds for measurable change were small. Participants found the FFMT easy to use, interpret, and valuable for long-term monitoring. Conclusion: The FFMT demonstrates high reliability and usability, with self-administered assessments performing comparably to instructor-led administration. These findings support the FFMT as an accessible, scalable tool capable of enabling accurate self-monitoring of functional fitness across clinical, community, and population settings, with potential to facilitate early detection of functional decline and promote prevention-focused healthy ageing.
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.