↓ Skip to main content

A cross-sectional study of the association between dynapenia and higher-level functional capacity in daily living in community-dwelling older adults in Japan

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
148 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A cross-sectional study of the association between dynapenia and higher-level functional capacity in daily living in community-dwelling older adults in Japan
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12877-016-0400-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Masaki Iwamura, Masao Kanauchi

Abstract

There are many reports that dynapenia, sarcopenia and frailty each have associations with bodily function or with Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL). However, studies that compare all three conditions and their effects on IADL are lacking. The purpose of this study is to examine associations of sarcopenia, frailty, and dynapenia with IADL. Participants included 123 community-dwelling older adults (31 men, 92 women,) aged 65 years or older (75.0 ± 5.3 years) who were independent in IADL. In terms of physical function, measurements were performed for muscle mass, grip strength, walking speed, isometric knee extension strength, and unipedal standing. A questionnaire survey was carried out, the Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Gerontology Index of Competence (TMIG-IC) was administered, and participants were asked about sense of fatigue and amount of activity. Dynapenia was associated with classifications of both frailty and sarcopenia. In addition, sarcopenia had a sensitivity and specificity for dynapenia of 33 and 89%, respectively. Frailty had a sensitivity and specificity for dynapenia of 17 and 98%, respectively. Dynapenia was a significant independent related factor for the TMIG-IC (β = -0.21, P < 0.05). Dynapenia, more than sarcopenia or frailty, was related to difficulties with IADL; therefore, assessment of dynapenia should be given greater emphasis in evaluating the physical functioning of older adults.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 148 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 19%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Researcher 14 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 24 16%
Unknown 47 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 26 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 16%
Sports and Recreations 11 7%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 64 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 February 2017.
All research outputs
#14,324,882
of 22,947,506 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#2,158
of 3,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,092
of 421,474 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#54
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,947,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,215 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,474 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.