z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
SHORT TERM (24 HOURS) AND LONG TERM (1 YEAR) ASSESSMENTS OF RELIABILITY IN OLDER ADULTS: CAN ONE REPLACE THE OTHER?
Author(s) -
Tsutomu Abe,
Scott J. Dankel,
Samuel L. Buckner,
Matthew B. Jessee,
Kevin T. Mattocks,
J. Grant Mouser,
Zachary W. Bell,
Jeremy P. Loenneke
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
journal of aging research and lifestyle
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2534-773X
DOI - 10.14283/jarcp.2018.15
Subject(s) - reliability (semiconductor) , medicine , term (time) , physical therapy , test (biology) , statistics , physical medicine and rehabilitation , mathematics , paleontology , power (physics) , physics , quantum mechanics , biology
There may be some individuals who do not adapt favorably to an exercise stimulus. This is most commonly determined by assessing the error of the measurement across two separate testing sessions separated by a short period of time. It has been recommended that this error be assessed over the same time frame as the intervention. We examined the 24-h test-retest reliability (n=18, aged 42 to 64 years) of forearm muscle thickness, handgrip strength, and “muscle quality” and compared that to the reliability observed when visits are separated by 1-year (n=80, aged 60 to 79 years). The measurement errors were greater in all measured variables following test-retest separated by 1-year than the test-retest separated by 24-hours. Our findings suggest that a time-matched control group is likely important to fully capture the error of the tester as well as the error associated with random biological variability within a timed intervention.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom