Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 564

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Physical Performance Measures in Aging Research

Guralnik, J. M., Branch, L. G., Cummings, S. R., Curb, J. D.·1989·Journal of Gerontology

Abstract

Evaluation of physical functioning plays a valuable role in clinical geriatrics as well as in aging research. Physical functioning has generally been assessed through self- or proxy-report. An important addition to this form of assessment is the use of performance measures of physical function, in which individuals are asked to actually perform specific tasks and are evaluated using standardized criteria. Although there has been limited methodological work on physical performance instruments, this approach offers a number of potential advantages. Several performance assessments have been developed that correlate highly with other measures of health status and predict need for long-term care and mortality. It is suggested that more widespread use be made of physical performance assessments and that they be evaluated as measures of functioning in cross-national studies, as indicators of change in functioning over time, as endpoints in intervention studies, as tools for identifying persons functioning at high levels, and as sources of relevant information for the clinician.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/geronj/44.5.m141

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Guralnik, J. M., Branch, L. G., Cummings, S. R., & Curb, J. D.
Venue
Journal of Gerontology
Published
1989-09-01
Volume
44
Issue
5
Pages
M141-M146
ISSN
0022-1422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2149100552
Cited by
564
References
0
FWCI
8.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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.