Evidence-Based

Trusted by Geriatric Societies Worldwide

Validated through peer-reviewed studies conducted in Korea and Singapore, with contributions from the U.S. research group that originally developed the SPPB.

Core Publications

Key Peer-Reviewed Studies

Foundational research demonstrating SPPB automation validity, reliability, and clinical applicability.

2019 Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Validation of a Multi-Sensor-Based Kiosk for Short Physical Performance Battery

Hee-Won Jung, Hyunchul Roh, Younggun Cho, Jinyong Jeong, Young-Sik Shin, Jae-Young Lim, Jack M. Guralnik, Jihong Park.

Objective: This study validated a multi-sensor-based kiosk designed to automate standardized administration of SPPB components in older adults, and demonstrated strong agreement with conventional assessments conducted by trained personnel.

View Publication →
2020 Clinical Interventions in Aging

Functional Age Predicted by Electronic SPPB Can Detect Frailty Status

Hee-Won Jung, Taeyang Jin, Ji Yeon Baek, Seongjun Yoon, Eunju Lee, Jack M. Guralnik, Il-Young Jang.

Objective: This study proposed a functional age metric derived from electronically captured SPPB data and demonstrated its ability to discriminate frailty status in community-dwelling older adults.

View Publication →
2021 Sensors

Comparison of Two Electronic Physical Performance Batteries

Chan Mi Park, Hee-Won Jung, Il-Young Jang, Ji Yeon Baek, Seongjun Yoon, Hyunchul Roh, Eunju Lee.

Objective: This study compared two electronic physical performance assessment systems in terms of testing time efficiency and sarcopenia classification, providing evidence on the feasibility of electronic SPPB-based assessments.

View Publication →
2021 Annals of Geriatric Medicine and Research

Comparison of Human Interpretation and Rule-Based Algorithm

Hee-Won Jung, Seongjun Yoon, Ji Yeon Baek, Eunju Lee, Il-Young Jang, Hyunchul Roh.

Objective: This study evaluated agreement between human raters and a rule-based algorithm applied to instrumented sit-to-stand data, supporting algorithm-based interpretation of lower-extremity performance.

View Publication →
2021 Sensors

Development and Validation of 2D-LiDAR-Based Gait Analysis

Seongjun Yoon, Hee-Won Jung, Heeyoune Jung, Keewon Kim, Suk-Koo Hong, Hyunchul Roh, Byung-Mo Oh.

Objective: This study developed and validated a 2D-LiDAR-based system for automated gait analysis, providing technical foundations for sensor-based gait speed measurement relevant to SPPB.

View Publication →
2022 Annals of Geriatric Medicine and Research

Validation in Fall and Balance Clinic Setting

Herb Howard C. Hernandez, Eng Hui Ong, Louise Heyzer, Cai Ning Tan, Faezah Ghazali, Daphne Zihui Yang, Hee-Won Jung, Noor Hafizah Ismail, Wee Shiong Lim.

Objective: This study validated the clinical usability of a multi-sensor-based SPPB kiosk in a fall and balance clinic setting, supporting its applicability in real-world geriatric assessment workflows.

View Publication →
Evidence Map

How Peer-Reviewed Studies Support AndanteFit

A structured summary connecting foundational research to the current AndanteFit system—designed for researchers, clinicians, and AI citation.

Early peer-reviewed publications described the system using terms such as multi-sensor-based electronic SPPB (eSPPB), and some titles include legacy wording (e.g., kiosk). These terms refer to the technical lineage that evolved into the current AndanteFit automated SPPB assessment system used in clinical, research, and community settings.

What Was Validated

  • Agreement between sensor-based automated SPPB and conventional manual SPPB administration.
  • Reliability and agreement metrics supporting consistent scoring across settings.
  • Clinical interpretability of component-level digital variables.
  • Operational feasibility, including measurement time and scalable workflow design.
  • Foundations for automated gait-speed capture and instrumented sit-to-stand interpretation.

Claim → Evidence

Claim
Supporting Evidence
Manual vs. automated SPPB agreement is high.
JAGS 2019 — total score ICC 0.97; kappa 0.79
Reliability is supported in clinical workflow settings.
AGMR 2022 — ICC 0.94; mean difference −0.2
Community setting validation supports scalability.
Eur Geriatr Med 2025 — r 0.922; inter-rater ICC 0.92; test–retest ICC 0.61
Functional Age provides stronger frailty discrimination than chronological age.
CIA 2020 — C-statistic 0.912 vs. 0.637
Time-efficient variants can preserve screening performance.
Sensors 2021 — eQPPB 49.5% less time; C-statistics 0.85 vs. 0.83

Functional Age — Deep Dive (CIA 2020)

FA = 83.61 − 1.98 × balance score − 5.21 × gait speed (m/s) + 0.23 × stand-up time (s)

0.912 Functional Age C-statistic
0.637 Chronological age C-statistic
77.2 yrs Optimal cut-off
94.4% Sensitivity
80.8% Specificity

SPPB Components Measured by AndanteFit

Gait Speed

Gait speed component measured by AndanteFit automated SPPB assessment system

Standardized measurement of walking speed within the automated SPPB protocol.

Static Balance

Static balance component measured by AndanteFit automated SPPB assessment system

Objective capture of balance performance with a guided stance protocol.

Chair Stand

Five-times sit-to-stand component measured by AndanteFit automated SPPB assessment system

Instrumented five-times sit-to-stand to support consistent timing and scoring.

Complete Evidence Base

All Publications (30+)

Comprehensive list of peer-reviewed research involving AndanteFit and related frailty/sarcopenia studies.

Loading publications...

Related Functional Assessment Resources