ArticleBMC public health2026
Functional limitation and cardiometabolic health: a cross-sectional exploration in adults aged 30 and older in rural Punjab, India.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe investigated the distribution of cardiometabolic health outcomes in people with and without functional limitation in rural India.
methodIn a cross-sectional, population-based sample of 3,023 adults aged ≥ 30 years in a rural setting in Punjab, India, functional limitation was classified using the Barthel Index. Cardiometabolic health measures included objectively measured obesity, hypertension, and diabetes status, as well as health behaviors and psychosocial factors that relate to cardiometabolic health. We compared the prevalence of each cardiometabolic health measure by functional limitation status.
resultThe prevalence of functional limitation was 2.71% (females 3.06%, males 2.30%). The prevalence of hypertension (70.7% vs. 54.5%) and diabetes (29.3% vs. 12.3%) was higher in people with functional limitation (PWFL) compared with people without functional limitation (PWoFL), but no differences existed after age- and sex-adjustment. Age and sex-adjusted prevalence differences (aPDs) in health indicators between PWFL and PWoFL showed that achieving ≥ 150 min/week physical activity was lower among PWFL (aPD=-13.5%; 95% CI: -25.9, -1.0), while sitting for > 3 h/day was higher (aPD = 35.0%; 95% CI: 26.2, 43.7). PWFL also had higher difficulty in doing daily work (aPD = 15.9%; 95% CI: 3.5, 28.3), higher hospitalization in the past year (aPD = 19.7%; 95% CI: 9.0, 30.5), more depressive symptoms (mean difference = 1.8; 95% CI: 1.0, 2.5), and lower self-rated health [range:0-100] (mean difference=-15.0; 95% CI: −18.8, − 11.2).
conclusionRoughly 3% of adults reported functional limitation. PWFL reported worse cardiometabolic health behaviors and self-rated health. Given the limited data on functional limitation in rural India, these findings offer a starting point for tailored screening and interventions to improve health and well-being in this population.
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.