衰弱标志物在解释五个老年人样本个体差异中的作用。
Contribution of frailty markers in explaining differences among individuals in five samples of older persons.
机构信息
Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Community studies, Solidage Research Group, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Canada.
出版信息
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2012 Nov;67(11):1197-204. doi: 10.1093/gerona/gls084. Epub 2012 Mar 28.
BACKGROUND
There has been little research on the relative importance of frailty markers. The objective was to investigate the association among seven frailty domains (nutrition, physical activity, mobility, strength, energy, cognition, and mood) and their relative contribution in explaining differences among individuals in five samples of older persons.
METHODS
Data from five studies of aging were analyzed using multiple correspondence analysis. Aggregation of frailty markers was evaluated using graphical output. Decomposition of variability was used to assess the relative contribution of each marker in each sample. Results were combined across the samples to assess the average contribution.
RESULTS
Frailty markers were found to consistently aggregate in each sample, suggesting a possible underlying construct. Physical strength had the highest contribution on average in explaining differences among individuals. Mobility and energy also had large contributions. Nutrition and cognition had the smallest contributions.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results provide further evidence supporting the notion that frailty domains may belong to a common construct. Physical strength may be the most important discriminating characteristic.
背景
关于脆弱性标志物的相对重要性，研究甚少。本研究旨在探讨七个脆弱性领域（营养、身体活动、移动能力、力量、能量、认知和情绪）之间的关联，以及它们在解释五个老年人样本个体差异方面的相对贡献。
方法
采用多元对应分析对五项老龄化研究的数据进行分析。使用图形输出评估脆弱性标志物的聚集情况。使用可变性分解评估每个标志物在每个样本中的相对贡献。合并各样本的结果，以评估平均贡献。
结果
在每个样本中，脆弱性标志物都被发现一致聚集，表明可能存在一个潜在的结构。体力平均而言对解释个体差异的贡献最大。移动能力和能量也有较大的贡献。营养和认知的贡献最小。
结论
我们的研究结果进一步支持了脆弱性领域可能属于共同结构的观点。体力可能是最重要的区分特征。
Zotero 插件