Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 804

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Subsystems Contributing to the Decline in Ability to Walk: Bridging the Gap Between Epidemiology and Geriatric Practice in the InCHIANTI Study

Ferrucci, Luigi, Bandinelli, Stefania, Benvenuti, Enrico, Di Iorio, Angelo, Macchi, Claudio, Harris, Tamara B., Guralnik, Jack M·2000·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
DOI 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2000.tb03873.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Older patients are often referred to geriatricians because of complaints of progressive difficulties in walking. The diagnostic and therapeutic approach to these patients is complex. Multiple physiologic subsystems may influence the ability to walk, and no standard criteria are currently available to establish whether these subsystems are functioning within the normal range. To address this lack of knowledge we conducted the InCHIANTI study. OBJECTIVE: To identify measures that clinicians can use to understand the causes of walking difficulties in older persons. DESIGN: A population‐based study of persons living in the Chianti geographic area (Tuscany, Italy). PARTICIPANTS: 1453 persons (age‐range 20–102 years; 91.6% of the eligible) selected from city registry of Greve in Chianti and Bagno a Ripoli (Tuscany, Italy), using a multistage sampling method. MEASUREMENTS: Factors that influence walking ability were classified into six main physiologic subsystems: central nervous system, perceptual system, peripheral nervous system, muscles, bone/joints, and energy production/delivery. Measures of the integrity and functioning of each of these proposed subsystems were identified and administered to all participants. CONCLUSIONS: Data collected in InCHIANTI will be used to identify the main risk factors that influence loss of the ability to walk in older persons, to define physiologic subsystems that are critical for walking, to select the best measures of their integrity, and to establish critical ranges in these measures that are compatible with “normal” walking ability. The final goal is to translate epidemiological research into a geriatric clinical tool that makes possible more precise diagnosis and more effective treatment in patients with walking dysfunction.

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 · 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2000.tb03873.x

Cites

8 of 8 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 8 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Ferrucci, L., Bandinelli, S., Benvenuti, E., Di Iorio, A., Macchi, C., Harris, T. B., & Guralnik, J. M.
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-12
Volume
48
Issue
12
Pages
1618-1625
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
DOI
10.1111/j.1532-5415.2000.tb03873.x
OpenAlex
W1985305462
Cited by
804
References
8
FWCI
30.52
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.