Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,101

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Development and Validation of Criterion-Referenced Clinically Relevant Fitness Standards for Maintaining Physical Independence in Later Years

Rikli, R. E., Jones, C. J.·2013·The Gerontologist

Abstract

PURPOSE: To develop and validate criterion-referenced fitness standards for older adults that predict the level of capacity needed for maintaining physical independence into later life. The proposed standards were developed for use with a previously validated test battery for older adults-the Senior Fitness Test (Rikli, R. E., & Jones, C. J. (2001). Development and validation of a functional fitness test for community--residing older adults. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity, 6, 127-159; Rikli, R. E., & Jones, C. J. (1999a). Senior fitness test manual. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.). METHODS: A criterion measure to assess physical independence was identified. Next, scores from a subset of 2,140 "moderate-functioning" older adults from a larger cross-sectional database, together with findings from longitudinal research on physical capacity and aging, were used as the basis for proposing fitness standards (performance cut points) associated with having the ability to function independently. Validity and reliability analyses were conducted to test the standards for their accuracy and consistency as predictors of physical independence. RESULTS: Performance standards are presented for men and women ages 60-94 indicating the level of fitness associated with remaining physically independent until late in life. Reliability and validity indicators for the standards ranged between .79 and .97. IMPLICATIONS: The proposed standards provide easy-to-use, previously unavailable methods for evaluating physical capacity in older adults relative to that associated with physical independence. Most importantly, the standards can be used in planning interventions that target specific areas of weakness, thus reducing risk for premature loss of mobility and independence.

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/geront/gns071

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 1,101

Metadata

Authors
Rikli, R. E., & Jones, C. J.
Venue
The Gerontologist
Published
2012-05-20
Volume
53
Issue
2
Pages
255-267
ISSN
  • 0016-9013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-5341
OpenAlex
W2130388894
Cited by
1,101
References
7
FWCI
67.97
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Development and Validation of Criterion-Referenced Clinically Relevant Fitness Standards for Maintaining Physical Independence in Later Years. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/geront/gns071
The paper
Rikli, R. E., & Jones, C. J. (2013). Development and Validation of Criterion-Referenced Clinically Relevant Fitness Standards for Maintaining Physical Independence in Later Years. The Gerontologist. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gns071

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.