↓ Skip to main content

高齢者総合機能評価は健診よりも健康寿命喪失を予測する:JAGESコホート研究

Overview of attention for article published in Nihon Ronen Igakkai zasshi Japanese journal of geriatrics, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
高齢者総合機能評価は健診よりも健康寿命喪失を予測する:JAGESコホート研究
Published in
Nihon Ronen Igakkai zasshi Japanese journal of geriatrics, July 2018
DOI 10.3143/geriatrics.55.367
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daichi Okabe, Taishi Tsuji, Katsunori Kondo

Abstract

In Japan, the Kihon checklist, which a useful part of the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA), is performed using questionnaire. On the other hand, specific health checkup screens are available for some basic diseases, such as diabetes and dyslipidemia, which can cause stroke, the largest cause of long-term care need. However, to date, no report has compared CGA and health checkups in older people for their ability to predict healthy life expectancy; therefore, this study was undertaken to do that. Data from the Japan Gerontological Evaluation Study (JAGES) 2010, a self-administered mail survey of independent people aged 65 years or older, were used. A total of 9,756 participants in six cities responded to the questionnaire, underwent a health check, and were followed up for 3 years.Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) for the eventual need for long-term care level 2 or more or death, adjusting for sex, age, drinking or smoking habits, educational years, and equivalent income. Explanatory variables in the Kihon checklist included seven risks, namely, general frailty, functional disability, malnutrition, oral dysfunction, seclusion, cognitive impairment, and depression, and in specific health checkups, 15 required items including metabolic syndrome. The incident rate of long-term care level 2 or more or death was 19.4/1,000 person-years. All risks in the Kihon checklist, excluding oral dysfunction, were significant (range of HRs: 1.44-3.63). Six items in the specific health checkups (urine protein, low BMI, AST, HDL, FPG, and HbA1c) were significant (range of HRs: 1.37-2.07). Metabolic syndrome was not significant (HR: 1.05). Therefore, CGA performed using questionnaire predicts healthy life expectancy better than a health checkup based on a blood test.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 18%
Other 6 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Professor 2 5%
Student > Master 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 12 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Psychology 3 8%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 15 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 August 2018.
All research outputs
#23,195,360
of 25,852,155 outputs
Outputs from Nihon Ronen Igakkai zasshi Japanese journal of geriatrics
#321
of 364 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#300,425
of 342,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nihon Ronen Igakkai zasshi Japanese journal of geriatrics
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,852,155 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 364 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 342,557 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.