Literature DB >> 31463926

Individual healthy aging indices, measurements and scores.

Jean-Pierre Michel1, Christophe Graf2, Fiona Ecarnot3,4.   

Abstract

The positive gerontological approach to aging has resulted in successive terminologies to describe the process of aging, including successful aging, active aging, healthy aging, or healthy and active aging, amongst others. Each definition proposed by geriatricians, psychologists, sociologists or public health specialists has been based on specific aspects of aging that are most important to the authors' discipline, explaining the current difficulty in determining which is the best set of criteria to determine "good aging". Two successive analyses of the measurements used in longitudinal studies from 1989 to 2018 testify to this heterogeneity in the types of questions proposed to evaluate the quality of the individual aging process. To confront this complexity, new and integrated indices have successively been proposed to quantify and qualify the survival period of aging individuals. The present paper aims to describe and compare the value of the "healthy aging index", the "modified healthy aging index", the "healthy aging score" and the "selfie aging test". Attempts to date to identify the best individual measurement of "aging well" have been interesting, and certainly show promise, but their limitations to specific populations call for more concerted effort from the scientific community to obtain worldwide validation. Another option would be to identify the best self-assessment questionnaire and include it in a mobile device, enabling longer term personal follow-up of aging functions. There is a clear lack of data of this type at present, and an urgent need to obtain such information, to enable early and targeted interventions.

Keywords:  Aging; Healthy aging; Healthy aging index; Healthy aging score; Selfie aging test

Year:  2019        PMID: 31463926     DOI: 10.1007/s40520-019-01327-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aging Clin Exp Res        ISSN: 1594-0667            Impact factor:   3.636


  4 in total

1.  A longitudinal view of successful aging with HIV: role of resilience and environmental factors.

Authors:  Nancy E Mayo; Marie-Josée Brouillette; Lyne Nadeau; Nandini Dendukuri; Marianne Harris; Fiona Smaill; Graham Smith; Réjean Thomas; Lesley K Fellows
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-08-30       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Influence of perceived importance of the internet on life satisfaction and health of the older people: An analysis based on intermediary and moderating effects.

Authors:  Kai Gao; Mao-Min Jiang; Zheng-Yu Wu; Pei-Pei Guo
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2022-08-19

3.  Healthy aging index and its link with relative education between individual and neighborhood: a population-based, cohort study.

Authors:  Chunyu Lu; Jingru Zong; Lingli Wang; Yajie Du; Qing Wang
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2022-10-03       Impact factor: 4.070

4.  Development of a common scale for measuring healthy ageing across the world: results from the ATHLOS consortium.

Authors:  Albert Sanchez-Niubo; Carlos G Forero; Yu-Tzu Wu; Iago Giné-Vázquez; Matthew Prina; Javier De La Fuente; Christina Daskalopoulou; Elena Critselis; Alejandro De La Torre-Luque; Demosthenes Panagiotakos; Holger Arndt; José Luis Ayuso-Mateos; Ivet Bayes-Marin; Jerome Bickenbach; Martin Bobak; Francisco Félix Caballero; Somnath Chatterji; Laia Egea-Cortés; Esther García-Esquinas; Matilde Leonardi; Seppo Koskinen; Ilona Koupil; Blanca Mellor-Marsá; Beatriz Olaya; Andrzej Pająk; Martin Prince; Alberto Raggi; Fernando Rodríguez-Artalejo; Warren Sanderson; Sergei Scherbov; Abdonas Tamosiunas; Beata Tobias-Adamczyk; Stefanos Tyrovolas; Josep Maria Haro
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2021-07-09       Impact factor: 7.196

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.