Skip to main content

Table 4 The physical capability of women compared to men and evidence for an interaction between age and sex

From: The physical capability of community-based men and women from a British cohort: the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer (EPIC)-Norfolk study

  

Regression coefficient (95% Confidence interval)

Physical capability measure

N

Women compared to mena

Interaction term: Age* Sexb

  

Adjusted for age

Adjusted for age, height & weight

Adjusted for age

Adjusted for age, height & weight

Maximum grip strength, kg

8457

−15.32* (-15.58, -15.06)

−12.35* (-12.72, -11.98)

0.24* (0.21,0.27)

0.24* (0.21,0.27)

Usual walking speed, m/s

8512

−0.05* (-0.06, -0.04)

−0.01 (-0.02, 0.01)

−0.001** (-0.002,-0.0002)

−0.001** (-0.002,-0.0001)

Timed chair stands, ln(s)

7570

0.05* (0.03, 0.06)

0.12* (0.10, 0.14)

−0.001 (-0.001,0.002)

0.001 (-0.001,0.002)

Standing balance, OR

8603

1.85* (1.61, 2.12)

1.82* (1.48, 2.23)

0.98 (0.97, 1.00)

0.98 (0.97, 1.00)

  1. aRegression models evaluated the mean difference in maximum grip strength and usual walking speed and the relative (percentage) difference in chair stand time in women compared to men. In terms of standing balance, the odds of being unable to hold a tandem stand for 10 seconds in women compared to men is represented.
  2. bRegression models evaluated age-sex interactions with age, sex, height and weight included in the model as well as the interaction term. Positive regression coefficients represent a diminishing gap between women and men as age increases whereas negative coefficients indicate a widening gap, if men are more physically capable than women in the youngest age-group.
  3. *P value <0.001; **P value <0.05.
  4. N number, kg kilograms, m/s metres/ second, Ln(s) natural logarithm(seconds), OR odds ratio.