The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 16 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Mobility limitations are prevalent, potentially reversible precursors to mobility loss that may go undetected in older adults. This study evaluates standardized administration of an endurance walk test for identifying unrecognized and impending mobility limitation in community elders. METHODS: Men and women (1480 and 1576, respectively) aged 70-79 years with no reported mobility limitation participating in the Health, Aging and Body Composition study were administered the Long Distance Corridor Walk. Walk performance was examined to determine unrecognized mobility deficits at baseline and predict new self-recognition of mobility limitation within 2 years. RESULTS: On testing, 23% and 36% of men and women evidenced mobility deficits defined as a contraindication to exertion, meeting stopping criteria or exceeding 7 minutes to walk 400 m. Unrecognized deficits increased with age and were more prevalent in blacks, smokers, obese individuals, and infrequent walkers. Within 2 years, 21% and 34% of men and women developed newly recognized mobility limitation; those with baseline unrecognized deficits had higher rates, 40% and 54% (p <.001), respectively. For each additional 30 seconds over 5 minutes needed to walk 400 m, likelihood of newly recognized mobility limitation increased by 65% and 37% in men and women independent of age, race, obesity, smoking status, habitual walking, reported walking ease, and usual gait speed. CONCLUSIONS: A sizable proportion of elders who report no walking difficulty have observable deficits in walking performance that precede and predict their recognition of mobility limitation. Endurance walk testing can help identify these deficits and provide the basis for treatment to delay progression of mobility loss.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
25 Own result · 12 Not checked yet · 8 Own interpretation · 3 Own method · 1 No basis given
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Using a more restrictive definition of poor performance on the LDCW, needing .6.5 minutes to complete 400 m, for instance, improves sensitivity to .53 and .64 with little diminution of specificity (.81 and .69).”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For each additional 30 seconds over 5 minutes needed to walk 400 m, likelihood of newly recognized mobility limitation increased by 65% and 37% in men and women independent of age, race, obesity, smoking status, habitual walking, reported walking ease, and usual gait speed.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Persons identified as having unrecognized deficits at baseline had higher rates of newly recognized limitation (40.0%vs 15.8% in men and 54.0% vs 23.6% in women; p , .001) and mobility disability (18.2% vs 3.7% in men and 23.1% vs 6.0% in women; p , .001) relative to those with no objective evidence of mobility deficits at baseline.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Persons identified as having unrecognized deficits at baseline had higher rates of newly recognized limitation (40.0%vs 15.8% in men and 54.0% vs 23.6% in women; p , .001) and mobility disability (18.2% vs 3.7% in men and 23.1% vs 6.0% in women; p , .001) relative to those with no objective evidence of mobility deficits at baseline.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On testing, 23% and 36% of men and women evidenced mobility deficits defined as a contraindication to exertion, meeting stopping criteria or exceeding 7 minutes to walk 400 m.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, due to safety concerns, participants were stopped when their test heart rate exceeded 135 beats per minute (accounting for 44% of those who stopped).”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown in Table 4, both men and women attempting but not completing the LDCW or needing at least 7 minutes to walk 400 m were four times as likely to report newly selfrecognized mobility limitation as those completing the LDCW.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even persons completing 400 m in 5 minutes and 30 seconds exhibited elevated risk.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Despite reports of no walking difficulty, 23% of men and 36% of women exhibited evidence of unrecognized mobility deficits; 12% and 14%, respectively, met established criteria indicating that brisk walking may be unsafe (21), and 11% and 22% showed objective evidence of mobility deficits, either because they could not complete the LDCW (7% and 14%) or needed .7 minutes to walk 400 m ''as quickly”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [21] source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“National surveys estimate upwards of 40% of persons 65 years old or older have mobility limitation (3,4), yet walking ability is not routinely or systematically assessed in clinical practice (5,6).”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 21
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
- Probably not a substantial claim. 5
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Evaluating the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of these assessments for identifying impending mobility limitation we found for both men and women, reporting that walking 1 mile is other than very easy had the highest sensitivity (.68 and .84)but lowest specificity (.62 and .50)and positive predictive value (.33 and .47)whereas gait speed ,1.0 m/s had the lowest sensitivity”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown in Table 1, within this cohort of 70-year-olds reporting no walking difficulty, 42% of men and 51% of women walked ,30 minutes in the previous week, of which .90% reported no walking at all.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After accounting for demographic and behavioral factors, gait speed, and reported ease walking 1 mile, men and women unable to complete or performing poorly on the LDCW were 2.66 (1.79-3.94)and 2.28 (1.70-3.05)times more likely to have newly recognized limitations.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Within 2 years, 21% and 34% of men and women met criteria for newly self-recognized mobility limitation by reporting difficulty walking one-quarter mile or climbing one flight of stairs at two consecutive semiannual contacts; 7% and 12% met criteria for mobility disability.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For instance, 48% of black women Note: Nonwalkers reported walking a total of ,30 minutes in a typical week.Persons with unrecognized mobility deficits constitute those who were either excluded from the Long Distance Corridor Walk-that is, had a medical contraindication to exertion, were unable to complete the 400-meter walk, or needed .7 minutes to walk 400 meters as quickly as possible.met crit”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unrecognized deficits were substantially greater in women who walked infrequently relative to women who walked at least 30 minutes per week-43.7%versus 27.5% (p , .001).Respective differences were less remarkable in men-25.7%versus 21.0% (p ¼ .041).”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, 55% of men and 38% of women reported that walking for 1 mile is very easy, and 85% and 71% had a usual gait speed exceeding 1.0 m/s, typically considered indicative of good mobility (12,14).”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Figure 1 shows that, in both men and women, those excluded from attempting and those unable to complete the LDCW had much higher rates of newly recognized limitation than those completing the LDCW, but that among persons completing the LDCW, men needing at least 6 minutes and 30 seconds and women needing at least 7 minutes had greater or comparably high rates of newly recognized limitation.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All three measures showed an independent association with newly self-recognized mobility limitation (Table 4), suggesting that each contributes a unique dimension of mobility status.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The respective odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for limitation and disability were 2.36 (1.75-3.18)and 4.02 (2.56-6.31) in men and 2.37 (1.85-3.04)and 2.93 (2.05-4.18) in women.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In these 739 men and 502 women, rates of newly selfrecognized limitation in those unable to complete the LDCW or needing more than 5.5 minutes to walk 400 m versus those completing 400 m in ,5.5 minutes were 20.1% versus 6.3% in men (p , .001) and 14.9% versus 9.2% in women (p ¼ .048).”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plaincorrelationaln = 739 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Examining this group separately, we found that 14% and 38% of men and women developed newly recognized mobility limitation in contrast to 64% and 67% who stopped for other reasons (p , .001).”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As nearly half did not routinely walk, it is not surprising that overall, 30% had unrecognized deficits and 27% developed selfrecognized mobility limitation within 2 years; of these persons, one third had mobility disability.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown in Table 3, in both men and women, the likelihood of unrecognized mobility deficits increased with age and was greater in blacks, current or recent smokers, and obese individuals independent of other attributes.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As evident from Table 4, both having a gait speed ,1.0 m/s and reporting that walking 1 mile is other than very easy predicted development of newly self-recognized mobility limitation.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite reports of no walking difficulty, 23% of men and 36% of women exhibited evidence of unrecognized mobility deficits; 12% and 14%, respectively, met established criteria indicating that brisk walking may be unsafe (21), and 11% and 22% showed objective evidence of mobility deficits, either because they could not complete the LDCW (7% and 14%) or needed .7 minutes to walk 400 m ''as quickly”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The study cohort mean age was 74 years, 51% were women and 42% were black, and equal numbers were from Memphis and Pittsburgh.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Within sex-strata, blacks and Memphis participants were more likely to walk infrequently as were current or recent male smokers, obese women, and women who did not complete high school.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Because older men typically demonstrate better physical performance than women at a given level of reported functioning (25), analyses were conducted separately for men and women.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > Statistical Analysis
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [25] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Self-paced corridor walks however, may be more practical for older adults in both clinical and community settings (30)(31)(32), and the LDCW in particular encourages a near maximal effort in older ambulatory adults (19).”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [19] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Last, we must acknowledge that test performance may have directly influenced participant discovery of existing walking difficulty.”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > DISCUSSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When sufficient time and/or space are unavailable, the multivariate analyses indicate that simply asking individuals whether walking 1 mile would be easy for them and/or administering a short walk test can aid identification of persons with covert mobility limitation (30).”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > DISCUSSION
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Previously, we demonstrated the prognostic value of the LDCW for identifying prevalent subclinical cardiovascular disease (26) and all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, cardiovascular events and functional limitation over 4-6 years (27).”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > DISCUSSION
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Mobility limitation, typically defined as reported difficulty walking for one-quarter mile or climbing one flight of stairs, represents an initial, potentially reversible stage of mobility loss; a precursor to mobility disability, the inability to ambulate without great difficulty or assistance (1,2).”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The link between fitness and functional capacity is well established (24,28), but rarely has objectively measured fitness been applied to identification of covert or impending mobility limitations (29).”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > DISCUSSION
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper relies on this without support.
Meeting the LDCW exclusion criteria, stopping criteria, or needing more than 7 minutes to walk 400 m indicates an unrecognized mobility deficit.
“Unrecognized mobility deficits.-Atbaseline, unrecognized mobility deficits were considered present when a participant: (a) met established exclusion criteria (see above) indicating a contraindication to exertion or outright refused to attempt the LDCW; (b) met stopping criteria and did not complete the LDCW; or (c) needed .7 minutes to walk 400 m, which equates to a cardiorespiratory fitness level”
The paper relies on this without support.
Self-reported absence of difficulty walking one-quarter mile accurately identifies older adults without mobility limitation.
“As a condition of study eligibility, all participants were free of reported difficulty walking for one-quarter mile.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Two consecutive semiannual reports of difficulty within 2 years represent persistent newly recognized mobility limitation.
“The requirement for two consecutive reports of difficulty distinguishes transient from persistent limitations.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The covariates included in the models adequately control for confounding of the association between LDCW performance and newly recognized mobility limitation.
“After accounting for demographic and behavioral factors, gait speed, and reported ease walking 1 mile, men and women unable to complete or performing poorly on the LDCW were 2.66 (1.79-3.94)and 2.28 (1.70-3.05)times more likely to have newly recognized limitations.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Six other articles were identified by the systematic review, all consistent with previous exposed results”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > Other Covariates
“Obesity was considered present if body mass index (BMI) derived from measured height and weight equaled or exceeded 30 kg/m 2 .”
§ Mobility Limitation in Self-Described Well-Functioning Older Adults: Importance of Endurance Walk Testing > Summary
“Obesity is defined as a body mass index calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared that exceeds 30.”
Citations
Cites
Guralnik, J. M., Simonsick, E. M., Ferrucci, L., Glynn, R. J., Berkman, L. F., Blazer, D. G., Scherr, P. A., & Wallace, R. B. (1994) · Journal of Gerontology · doi:10.1093/geronj/49.2.m85 · Cited by 9,792
Self-citation(2014) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 9,400
Lower-extremity function in persons over the age of 70 years as a predictor of subsequent disability
Guralnik, J. M., Ferrucci, L., Simonsick, E. M., Salive, M. E., & Wallace, R. B. (1995) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199503023320902 · Cited by 4,083
Self-citationAge-predicted maximal heart rate revisited
Tanaka, H., Monahan, K. D., & Seals, D. R. (2001) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/s0735-1097(00)01054-8 · Cited by 3,775 · cited 1×
“Heart rate was continuously monitored during testing (Polar Pacer, Model 61190; Polar Electro, Oy, Finland) and participants were stopped if: (a) their heart rate exceeded 135 beats per minute, which represents 85%–90% of the age-predicted maximum heart rate for persons aged 70–79 years (22); or (b) they experienced d…”
Verbrugge, L. M., & Jette, A. M. (1994) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/0277-9536(94)90294-1 · Cited by 3,310
Guralnik, J. M., Ferrucci, L., Pieper, C. F., Leveille, S. G., Markides, K. S., Ostir, G. V., Studenski, S., Berkman, L. F., & Wallace, R. B. (2000) · The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences · doi:10.1093/gerona/55.4.m221 · Cited by 2,898
Physical performance measures in the clinical setting
Studenski, S., Perera, S., Wallace, D., Chandler, J. M., Duncan, P. W., Rooney, E., Fox, M., & Guralnik, J. M. (2003) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1046/j.1532-5415.2003.51104.x · Cited by 1,218
Cesari, M., Kritchevsky, S. B., Penninx, B. W. H. J., Nicklas, B. J., Simonsick, E. M., Newman, A. B., Tylavsky, F. A., Brach, J. S., Satterfield, S., Bauer, D. C., et al. (2005) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53501.x · Cited by 1,192 · cited 1×
“0 m/s, typically considered indicative of good mobility (12,14).”
Self-citationGuidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription
Sharp, N. C. C. (1993) · British Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1136/bjsm.27.2.138-a · Cited by 1,190
Newman, A. B., Simonsick, E. M., Naydeck, B. L., Boudreau, R. M., Kritchevsky, S. B., Nevitt, M. C., Pahor, M., Satterfield, S., Brach, J. S., Studenski, S. A., et al. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.295.17.2018 · Cited by 934
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- 2000, The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 55A, M221
- 2001, The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 56A, M644
- Gohdes, 2005, Preventing chronic disease [electronic resource], 2, A17
- 2001, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 137, 153
- 1999, The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 54A, M353
- 1994, The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 49A, M85
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Gait speed and survival in older adults.
Studenski, S. (2011) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2010.1923 · Cited by 4,558
Abellan Van Kan, G., Rolland, Y., Andrieu, S., Bauer, J., Beauchet, O., Bonnefoy, M., Cesari, M., Donini, L. M., Gillette-Guyonnet, S., Inzitari, M., et al. (2009) · The Journal of nutrition, health and aging · doi:10.1007/s12603-009-0246-z · Cited by 2,003
Self-citationTranslating Fatigue to Human Performance
ENOKA, R. M., & DUCHATEAU, J. (2016) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000000929 · Cited by 948
“The distance that can be walked in 2 min varies across the lifespan (Figure 3) and walking endurance is reduced in old adults (65-102 yrs) who self-report elevated levels of fatigue (61,70).”
BackgroundMobility in Older Adults: A Comprehensive Framework
Webber, S. C., Porter, M. M., & Menec, V. H. (2010) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/gnq013 · Cited by 914
“Approximately one third to one half of individuals 65 years of age or older report difficulties related to walking or climbing stairs (Shumway-Cook, Ciol, Yorkston, Hoffman, & Chan, 2005; Statistics Canada, 2007), which are common tests used to quantify mobility capabilities (Guralnik, Ferrucci, Simonsick, Salive, & W…”
BackgroundShimada, H., Makizako, H., Doi, T., Yoshida, D., Tsutsumimoto, K., Anan, Y., Uemura, K., Ito, T., Lee, S., Park, H., et al. (2013) · Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2013.03.010 · Cited by 455
Metadata
- Authors
- Simonsick, E. M., Newman, A. B., Visser, M., Goodpaster, B., Kritchevsky, S. B., Rubin, S., Nevitt, M. C., Harris, T. B., & for the Health, A. A. B. C. S.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
- Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
- University of California, San Francisco (US)
- National Institute on Aging (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2008-08-01
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 841-847
- ISSN
- 1079-5006 (ISSN-L)
- 1758-535X
- PMC
- PMC5722013
- OpenAlex
- W2168523787
- Semantic Scholar
- 0d9f55e9c15db6dd27d2fc5f457093b3cb91927e
- Cited by
- 147
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 19.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- The Journals of Gerontology Series A (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
- VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (N01-AG-6-2103, n01ag062101-007, n01ag062103-006, N01‐AG‐6‐2106, n01ag062106-007, N01-AG-6-2101)
- National Institute on Aging (N01‐AG‐6–2101, N01-AG-6-2101, N01-AG-6-2103, and N01-AG-6-2106, N01AG62106, N01-AG-62103)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Nutrition and Health in Aging
- Keywords
- mobility limitations, older adults, walking performance, Health, Aging, and Body Composition Study
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Disability Evaluation, Exercise Test, Female, Humans, Male, Physical Endurance, Cohort Studies, Multivariate Analysis, Walking, Mobility Limitation
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-05, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-05 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
