ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
AI-based prediction of SPPB scores using questionnaires of abilities: findings from the national health and aging trends study.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) is a widely used assessment tool to evaluate lower extremity function in older adults. However, it requires clinical settings which may not be feasible in all circumstances. This study aimed to develop alternative methods for indirectly estimating SPPB scores using questionnaire responses related to functional abilities.
methodsWe analyzed data from Round 12 of the National Health and Aging Trends Study, using 4,988 participants for statistical analyses, and 2,035 participants (1,628 for training and 407 for testing) for model development and validation. A total of 27 questionnaire items, covering basic and instrumental activities of daily living and physical activities, were used as predictors. Three artificial intelligence models were developed: a tree-based classifier, a multilayer perceptron (MLP) classifier, and a tree-based regressor. For comparison, summed abilities of each ability category and simplified summed ability derived from Shapley Additive Explanations analysis were used. Multiclass and binary classifications were performed using predefined SPPB cutoff values (scores ≤ 3 and ≥ 10).
resultsIn analysis comparing SPPB score groups (0-3, 4-9, 10-12), all 27 questionnaire variables were statistically significant. The summed abilities showed a Pearson correlation of 0.716 with total SPPB scores. In multiclass classification, the MLP classifier outperformed other models with a mean AUC of 0.803 (95% CI: 0.767-0.839). For binary classification, distinguishing between individuals with severe impairment (SPPB ≤ 3) and unimpaired function (SPPB ≥ 10), the MLP classifier again demonstrated the highest AUCs (0.907 for SPPB ≤ 3; 0.920 for SPPB ≥ 10). Summed abilities outperformed AI models in detecting severe impairment, with the total ability score reaching an AUC of 0.915. However, for detecting unimpaired function, AI models consistently outperformed summed abilities (maximum AUC of 0.898).
conclusionsThe proposed AI methods enable prediction of SPPB component scores, supporting indirect functional assessment when SPPB testing is not feasible. These tools can help reduce unnecessary clinical burden and cost by guiding SPPB administration decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.