Eveline Nüesch1, Perel Pablo1, Caroline E Dale1, David Prieto-Merino1, Meena Kumari2, Ann Bowling3, Shah Ebrahim1, Juan P Casas4. 1. Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK. 2. Institute of Epidemiology and Health, University College London, London, UK. 3. Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. 4. Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK Institute of Epidemiology and Health, University College London, London, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a prediction model for incident locomotor disability after 7 years in older adults. SETTING: Prospective British cohort studies: British Women's Heart and Health Study (BWHHS) for development and the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) for validation. SUBJECTS: Community-dwelling older adults. METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression models after selection of predictors with backward elimination. Model performance was assessed using metrics of discrimination and calibration. Models were internally and externally validated. RESULTS: Locomotor disability was reported in BWHHS by 861 of 1,786 (48%) women after 7 years. Age, a history of arthritis and low physical activity levels were the most important predictors of locomotor disability. Models using routine measures as predictors had satisfactory calibration and discrimination (c-index 0.73). Addition of 31 blood markers did not increase the predictive performance. External validation in ELSA showed reduced discrimination (c-index 0.65) and an underestimation of disability risks. A web-based calculator for locomotor disability is available (http://www.sealedenvelope.com/trials/bwhhsmodel/). CONCLUSIONS: We developed and externally validated a prediction model for incident locomotor disability in older adults based on routine measures available to general practitioners, patients and public health workers, and showed an adequate discrimination. Addition of blood markers from major biological pathways did not improve the performance of the model. Further replication in additional data sets may lead to further enhancement of the current model.
OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a prediction model for incident locomotor disability after 7 years in older adults. SETTING: Prospective British cohort studies: British Women's Heart and Health Study (BWHHS) for development and the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) for validation. SUBJECTS: Community-dwelling older adults. METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression models after selection of predictors with backward elimination. Model performance was assessed using metrics of discrimination and calibration. Models were internally and externally validated. RESULTS: Locomotor disability was reported in BWHHS by 861 of 1,786 (48%) women after 7 years. Age, a history of arthritis and low physical activity levels were the most important predictors of locomotor disability. Models using routine measures as predictors had satisfactory calibration and discrimination (c-index 0.73). Addition of 31 blood markers did not increase the predictive performance. External validation in ELSA showed reduced discrimination (c-index 0.65) and an underestimation of disability risks. A web-based calculator for locomotor disability is available (http://www.sealedenvelope.com/trials/bwhhsmodel/). CONCLUSIONS: We developed and externally validated a prediction model for incident locomotor disability in older adults based on routine measures available to general practitioners, patients and public health workers, and showed an adequate discrimination. Addition of blood markers from major biological pathways did not improve the performance of the model. Further replication in additional data sets may lead to further enhancement of the current model.
Authors: Nini H Jonkman; Vieri Del Panta; Trynke Hoekstra; Marco Colpo; Natasja M van Schoor; Stefania Bandinelli; Luca Cattelani; Jorunn L Helbostad; Beatrix Vereijken; Mirjam Pijnappels; Andrea B Maier Journal: Gerontology Date: 2017-12-13 Impact factor: 5.140
Authors: Jaime L Speiser; Kathryn E Callahan; Edward H Ip; Michael E Miller; Janet A Tooze; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Denise K Houston Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2022-05-05 Impact factor: 6.591
Authors: Nini H Jonkman; Marco Colpo; Jochen Klenk; Chris Todd; Trynke Hoekstra; Vieri Del Panta; Kilian Rapp; Natasja M van Schoor; Stefania Bandinelli; Martijn W Heymans; Dominique Mauger; Luca Cattelani; Michael D Denkinger; Dietrich Rothenbacher; Jorunn L Helbostad; Beatrix Vereijken; Andrea B Maier; Mirjam Pijnappels Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2019-06-27 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: Sara Fokdal Lehn; Ann-Dorthe Zwisler; Solvejg Gram Henneberg Pedersen; Thomas Gjørup; Lau Caspar Thygesen Journal: BMJ Open Qual Date: 2019-06-09