The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effects of Sensory Aids on the Quality of Life and Mortality of Elderly People: A Multivariate Analysis
Open accessAbstract
The present study aimed at clarifying the relationships between the use of sensory aids and the quality of life (QOL) and mortality of elderly people suffering from sensory deprivation. We carried out a cross-sectional survey on the QOL and the sensory status of an elderly cohort and a 6-year longitudinal follow-up of mortality rates among 1192 non-institutionalized people aged 70-75 years in a North Italian town. We classified respondents into three groups: those with functionally adequate visual and hearing acuity (n = 275); those with sensory impairment, corrected by the use of sensory aids (n = 680), and those with uncorrected sensory impairment (n = 245). In the whole sample, multiple logistic regression analyses showed that an uncorrected sensory deprivation was associated with a significant and independent impairment of mood, self-sufficiency in instrumental activities of daily living and social relationships. Such impairments were not apparent in the subjects with sensory impairments who were using sensory aids. In men with uncorrected sensory impairment the unadjusted 6-year mortality rate was almost twice that of the other two groups, which did not differ from each other. No corresponding differences were detected in women. Multivariate analysis showed that the effect of the sensory aid status on mortality was indirect and mediated through the global physical health status and the social relationships. We conclude that our cross-sectional data demonstrate an association between uncorrected sensory deprivation and a low QOL; such an association was not present in subjects with corrected sensory deprivation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Assessment of Older People: Self-Maintaining and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living
Lawton, M. P., & Brody, E. M. (1969) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/9.3_part_1.179 · Cited by 18,540
Cited by
Crews, J. E., & Campbell, V. A. (2004) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.94.5.823 · Cited by 587
Screening and Management of Adult Hearing Loss in Primary Care: Scientific Review
Yueh, B., Shapiro, N., MacLean, C. H., & Shekelle, P. G. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.15.1976 · Cited by 450
THE SOCIETAL COSTS OF SEVERE TO PROFOUND HEARING LOSS IN THE UNITED STATES
Mohr, P. E., Feldman, J. J., Dunbar, J. L., McConkey-Robbins, A., Niparko, J. K., Rittenhouse, R. K., & Skinner, M. W. (2000) · International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care · doi:10.1017/s0266462300103162 · Cited by 398
Metadata
- Authors
- APPOLLONIO, I., CARABELLESE, C., FRATTOLA, L., & TRABUCCHI, M.
- Venue
- Age and Ageing
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1996
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 89-96
- ISSN
- 0002-0729 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2834
- OpenAlex
- W2102131886
- Cited by
- 176
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.