ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Knowledge-practice concordance and discrepancies in very old adults.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Health-related knowledge is often considered a prerequisite for health behavior, but knowledge may not always translate into everyday practice. This study examined concordance and directional discrepancies between self-reported health-related knowledge and practice among very old adults. Methods: We analyzed data from 2,919 participants aged 80 years and older from the nationally representative Old Age in Germany (D80+) study (CATI Module 2). Health-related knowledge and self-reported health-related practice were assessed using ordinal self-report items. A positive knowledge-practice discrepancy was defined as reported knowledge exceeding reported practice. CATI2-calibrated complex-survey descriptive analyses were used to examine knowledge-practice patterns. Complex-survey logistic regression models examined factors associated with the presence of a positive discrepancy, while linear models examined its magnitude as a secondary outcome. Exploratory age-, sex-, and education-adjusted models compared the health, functional, and psychosocial profiles of participants with and without a positive discrepancy. Results: Most participants reported the highest category of health-related knowledge (74.2, 95% CI 71.8 to 76.5%) and self-reported practice (73.7, 95% CI 71.3 to 76.0%). Knowledge and practice were concordant in 76.5% of participants (95% CI 74.4 to 78.6%), whereas 12.2% showed a positive knowledge-practice discrepancy (95% CI 10.5 to 13.9%). In fully adjusted complex-survey models, higher internal control experience was associated with lower odds of a positive knowledge-practice discrepancy and with a smaller discrepancy magnitude. In exploratory health-profile analyses, positive discrepancy status was associated with lower ADL and IADL scores, more depressive symptoms, lower life satisfaction, more negative aging experiences, and lower internal control experience; these associations remained significant after false-discovery-rate correction. Conclusion: In very old adults, knowledge and practice were generally concordant, while a minority reported more knowledge than practice. Positive discrepancy status co-occurred with a less favorable functional and psychosocial profile, and internal control experience was the most consistent cross-sectional correlate. Longitudinal and behavior-specific studies are needed to clarify the direction and practical relevance of these associations.
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.