Back

Physical performance and risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in the United States: The Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study

Hanif, A. A. M.; Goyal, P.; Colantonio, L. D.; Safford, M. M.; Enogela, E. M.; Reid, R.-J.; Fasokun, M. E.; Akinyelure, O. P.; Bowling, C. B.; Quezada-Pinedo, H.; Sterling, M. R.; Levitan, E. B.

2026-04-01 epidemiology
10.64898/2026.03.30.26349789 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Poor physical performance, measured by gait speed and chair stands, is associated with mortality; associations may differ by history of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Methods: Among 14,137 REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study participants, gait speed and chair stand times (2013-2016) were categorized into quartiles and a fifth category with those who were unable to complete the test. Associations with adjudicated CVD and all-cause mortality through 2020 were examined among participants with and without history of CVD. Results: Average age was 72.5 {+/-} 8.5 years. Among participants without history of CVD, those in slowest vs. highest gait speed quartile had HRs of 2.01 (95% CI 1.18-3.43) for CVD and 1.66 (1.33-2.07) for all-cause mortality; among those unable to complete the test, HRs were 2.37 (1.12-5.03) for CVD and 2.33 (1.72-3.17) for all-cause mortality. Among participants with history of CVD, slowest gait speed quartile had HRs of 1.28 (0.96-1.72) for CVD and 1.72 (1.45-2.04) for all-cause mortality; HR among those unable to complete the test were 1.87 (1.29-2.70) for CVD and 2.74 (2.22-3.38) for all-cause mortality (p-interaction between with and without history of CVD <0.05). Inability to complete chair stand test was associated with higher mortality in both groups. Conclusions: Poor physical performance was associated with greater CVD-related and all-cause mortality among both individuals with and without a history of CVD, with the highest risks observed among those who were unable to the assessments.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.