PuSH - Publikationsserver des Helmholtz Zentrums München: Comparison of robustness, resilience and intrinsic capacity including prediction of long-term adverse health outcomes: The KORA-Age study.

Informationen

Hinweise zu Qualitätskriterien von Zeitschriften

Open-Access-Richtlinie der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft 2016

CC Licencences

Metriken für Publikationen

Navigation

Startseite

English

EVA: Veröffentlichen

Neuer EVA Antrag

Recherche

Erweiterte Suche

Durchblättern nach ...

... HMGU-Autoren/Konsortien

... Organisationsstruktur

... Zeitschriften

... Publikationstypen

... Forschungsdaten

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Erscheinungsjahr

Publikationen im Überblick

Statistik

HGF Fortschrittsbericht

OA Publikationen

Eintragen

Neue Publikation eintragen

Neue Publikation holen aus...

...EVA

Fehlende Publikation melden

Highlights

Suche

Hilfe & Kontakt

Ansprechpartner

Hilfe

Datenschutz

Helmholtz Open Science

Bibliometrische Indikatoren

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Rippl, M.* ; Huemer, M.-T. ; Schwettmann, L. ; Grill, E.* ; Peters, A. ; Drey, M.* ; Thorand, B.

Comparison of robustness, resilience and intrinsic capacity including prediction of long-term adverse health outcomes: The KORA-Age study.

J. Nutr. Health Aging 29:100433 (2025)

Verlagsversion

DOI

PMC

	Open Access Hybrid

Abstract
Metriken
Zusatzinfos

BACKGROUND: Frailty, resilience and intrinsic capacity (IC) are concepts to evaluate older person`s health status, but no comparison of their associations with adverse health outcomes exists. We therefore aimed to assess which concept is most useful for determining long-term health of older adults. METHODS: Analyses were based on the KORA (Cooperative Health Research in the Region of Augsburg)-Age study (n = 940, 65-93 years). Frailty was evaluated using the physical frailty-phenotype by Fried et al. For comparability to resilience and IC, we chose the protective concept of robustness instead of frailty in the present analysis. Resilience was measured by the 11-item resilience-scale. The IC-score was based on 4 domains (locomotion, cognition, vitality and psychiatric capacities). Associations with falls, disability, and hospitalization at 3-year and 7-year follow-up and with mortality were evaluated by multivariable adjusted logistic and Cox regression. Concept overlaps were illustrated by a Venn-diagram. RESULTS: In the fully adjusted models, robustness showed significant inverse associations with most outcomes (3-year follow-up: OR (95%CI): disability 0.448 (0.300-0.668), 7-year follow-up: falls 0.477 (0.298-0.764), hospitalization 0.547 (0.349-0.856), and all-cause mortality 0.649 (0.460-0.915)) while resilience and IC showed significant inverse associations with disability only (e.g., 7-year-follow-up: resilience: 0.467 (0.304-0.716), IC: 0.510 (0.329-0.793)). 23% of the participants met the criteria for both robustness and IC while 22% met those for robustness and resilience. CONCLUSION: Robustness was the most useful concept, showing the strongest protective associations for most adverse health outcomes. IC and resilience showed their main strengths in capturing protective associations for disabilities. Robustness overlapped with resilience and IC, supporting the concept of mind-body-interaction.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Altmetric

4.000

0.000