↓ Skip to main content

Sedentary Behavior Is Only Marginally Associated with Physical Function in Adults Aged 40–75 Years—the Maastricht Study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Sedentary Behavior Is Only Marginally Associated with Physical Function in Adults Aged 40–75 Years—the Maastricht Study
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00242
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeroen H. P. M. van der Velde, Hans H. C. M. Savelberg, Julianne D. van der Berg, Simone J. S. Sep, Carla J. H. van der Kallen, Pieter C. Dagnelie, Miranda T. Schram, Ronald M. A. Henry, Petronella L. M. Reijven, Tineke A. C. M. van Geel, Coen D. A. Stehouwer, Annemarie Koster, Nicolaas C. Schaper

Abstract

Background: In an aging population, regular physical activity (PA) and exercise have been recognized as important factors in maintaining physical function and thereby preventing loss of independence and disability. However, (older) adults spent the majority of their day sedentary and therefore insight into the consequences of sedentary behavior on physical function, independent of PA, is warranted. Objective: To examine the associations of objectively measured sedentary time (ST), patterns of sedentary behavior, overall PA, and higher intensity PA (HPA) with objective measures of physical function. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study in 1,932 men and women (aged 40-75 years) participating in The Maastricht Study. The activPAL3 was used to assess daily sedentary behavior: ST (h), sedentary breaks (n), prolonged (≥30 min) sedentary bouts (n), and to assess time spent in (H)PA (h). Measures of physical function included: covered distance during a 6 min walk test [6MWD (meters)], timed chair rise stand test performance [TCSTtime (seconds)], grip strength (kg kg(-1)), and elbow flexion and knee extension strength (Nm kg(-1)). Linear regression analyses were used to examine associations between daily sedentary behavior and PA with physical function. Results: Every additional hour ST was associated with shorter 6MWD [B = -2.69 m (95% CI = -4.69; -0.69)] and lower relative elbow extension strength (B = -0.01 Nm kg(-1) (-0.02; 0.00). More sedentary breaks were associated with faster TCSTtime: B = -0.55 s (-0.85; -0.26). Longer average sedentary bout duration was associated with slower TCSTtime [B = 0.17 s (0.09; 0.25)] and lower knee extension strength [B = -0.01 Nm kg(-1) (-0.02; 0.00)]. Every hour of PA and HPA were associated with greater 6MWD [BPA = 15.88 m (9.87; 21.89), BHPA = 40.72 m (30.18; 51.25)], faster TCSTtime [BPA = -0.55 s (-1.03; -0.07), BHPA = -2.25 s (-3.09; -1.41)], greater elbow flexion strength [BPA = 0.03 Nm kg(-1) (0.01; 0.07)], [BHPA = 0.05 Nm kg(-1) (0.01; 0.08)], and greater knee extension strength [BPA = 0.04 Nm kg(-1) (0.01; 0.07)], [BHPA = 0.13 Nm kg(-1) (0.06; 0.20)]. Conclusion: In adults aged 40-75 years, sedentary behavior appeared to be marginally associated with lower physical function, independent of HPA. This suggests that merely reducing sedentary behavior is insufficient to improve/maintain physical function. In contrast, engaging regularly in PA, in particular HPA, is important for physical function.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 26 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 11 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 11%
Sports and Recreations 7 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 34 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 July 2017.
All research outputs
#4,435,752
of 26,561,175 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#2,302
of 15,907 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,802
of 328,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#47
of 246 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,561,175 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,907 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,640 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 246 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.