Skip to main content

Table 1 Participants’ baseline characteristics by social frailty status

From: The association of social frailty with intrinsic capacity in community-dwelling older adults: a prospective cohort study

Variablea,b

Total

(N = 663)

Social

robustness

(N = 414)

Social

prefrailty

(N = 207)

Social

frailty

(N = 42)

P value*

Age, years

69.5 (4.5)

69.3 (4.5)

69.9 (4.5)

68.9 (4.1)

0.65

Sex, N (%)

 Men

287 (43.3)

192 (46.4)

91 (44.0)

4 (9.5)

< 0.01

 Women

376 (56.7)

222 (53.6)

116 (56.0)

38 (90.5)

 

Educational level, N (%)

  ≤ 9 years

38 (5.7)

19 (4.6)

13 (6.3)

6 (14.3)

0.01

 10–12 years

305 (46.0)

178 (43.0)

107 (51.7)

20 (47.6)

 

  > 12 years

320 (48.3)

217 (52.4)

87 (42.0)

16 (38.1)

 

Economic status, N (%)

 Need support

11 (1.7)

0 (0)

4 (1.9)

7 (16.7)

< 0.01

 Self-supporting

538 (81.1)

335 (80.9)

174 (84.1)

29 (69.0)

 

 Well off

114 (17.2)

79 (19.1)

29 (14.0)

6 (14.3)

 

 BMI, kg/m2

22.6 (2.8)

22.6 (2.7)

22.4 (2.7)

21.7 (2.4)

0.03

 CCI, scores

3.2 (1.2)

3.2 (1.2)

3.3 (1.2)

3.1 (1.2)

0.49

 MNA, scores

26.1 (2.3)

26.3 (2.2)

25.7 (2.3)

25.1 (2.2)

< 0.01

 GDS-15, scores

2.2 (2.7)

1.6 (2.0)

3.1 (3.3)

4.1 (3.2)

< 0.01

 Physical activity (BAQ), scores

7.6 (1.3)

7.8 (1.2)

7.4 (1.3)

6.6 (1.2)

< 0.01

 Usual walking speed, m/s

1.4 (0.2)

1.4 (0.2)

1.4 (0.2)

1.4 (0.2)

0.80

 Composite IC score

0.1 (0.4)

0.1 (0.4)

−0.1 (0.5)

− 0.2 (0.4)

< 0.01

 Locomotion domain score

0.1 (1.0)

0.1 (0.9)

−0.1 (1.0)

0.1 (1.0)

0.80

 Cognition domain score

0.2 (0.7)

0.2 (0.7)

0.2 (0.7)

0.3 (0.8)

0.43

 Psychological function domain score

−0.1 (1.0)

0.2 (0.8)

−0.3 (1.2)

− 0.7 (1.2)

< 0.01

 Vitality domain score

−0.1 (1.0)

0.1 (0.8)

−0.1 (0.8)

− 0.5 (0.6)

< 0.01

 Sensory function domain score

0.1 (1.0)

−0.1 (1.0)

0.1 (1.1)

−0.1 (0.9)

0.98

  1. Note. BMI Body mass index, CCI Charlson Comorbidity Index, MNA Mini-Nutritional Assessment, GDS-15 Geriatric Depression Scale-15, BAQ Baecke Physical Activity Questionnaire, IC Intrinsic capacity
  2. *Significant differences (P < 0.05) between the social robustness group, social prefrailty group, and social frailty group were analyzed using the chi-squared test of independence for the categorical variables and a linear trend estimation in a general linear model for the continuous variables
  3. aAll values are mean (standard deviation) unless specified
  4. bVariance inflation factor of each variable was all lower than 1.4