alles over ongeneeslijke ziektes

Living longer in good health

Methods for the assessment of biological age - A systematic review.

5 Repeated evidence

How much this weighs: several studies in people, combined — the strongest kind of evidence there is.
Type of study
meta-analysis or systematic review
Studied in
people
Participants
not stated in the abstract
Published
2025 in Maturitas
Cited
14 times by other research
Who paid
Not declared. PubMed carries no conflict-of-interest statement for most articles; that is not the same as independent.
Source
PubMed 39938306 · doi 10.1016/j.maturitas.2025.108215
The plain-language write-up of this study is still being written. Below is the abstract exactly as the researchers published it.
Abstract by the researchers — original text

Biological age has long been proposed to complement chronological age because it has the potential to provide a more accurate assessment of someone's ageing process and functional status. At present, there are several methods to determine an individual's biological age through the measurement of biomarkers of ageing. This review compares methods for assessing biological age in adults, analyses biomarkers of ageing, and determines the goals for which biological age can be calculated, in order to help determine a gold standard for measuring biological age. Articles were eligible if studies included a test battery and statistical method to calculate biological age. Literature research included the databases Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov. In total, 56 studies were included and the risk of bias in each of them was assessed. The most commonly used methods to assess biological age are Klemera and Doubal's method, principal component analysis, multiple linear regression, PhenoAge and Hochschild's method. Klemera and Doubal's method has proved the most reliable. Apart from using different statistical methods, the difference between the biological ageing scores lies in the choice of biomarkers of ageing, especially the inclusion of chronological age as a biomarker of ageing. Most of the included studies aimed to establish a new biological ageing score or compare biological age to different measurements of functionality of the human body. In conclusion, there is still no consensus on a gold standard and more research on this topic is necessary. Study protocol PROSPERO ID: CRD42021287548.