Research Article

Evidence for Possible Correlations and Effects of Senior Perceived Physical Literacy Instrument and the Senior Functional Fitness in Female Older Adults

Chien-Yu Liu
Department of Physical Education and Sport Science, National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan
* Corresponding author
Linda Li-Chuan Lin
Graduate Institute of Physical Education, Health & Leisure Studies, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan
Jiunn-Jye Sheu
School of Population Health University of Toledo, USA
Ching-Ping Lin
Department of Physical Education and Sport Science, National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan
DOI icon 10.24018/ejsport.2025.4.2.224

Read Counter
423

Downloads
130

Citations

Share

Article Sidebar

Submitted 2025-01-29
Published 2025-04-22

Read counter = 423 times

Table of Contents

Article Main Content

The evaluation of physical literacy has been extensively validated in adolescents, but its applicability to older adults remains underdeveloped. This study examines the relationship between functional fitness and physical competence in older women. A total of 350 female older adults from community centers in Southern Taiwan completed the 11-item Senior Perceived Physical Literacy Instrument (SPPLI-11) (Cronbach’s α = 0.90) and the Senior Functional Fitness Test (SFFT). Simple linear regression analyzed the correlation between SPPLI and SFFT components, while a t-test assessed SPPLI differences across age groups.

Waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) (β = −0.264, p < 0.05) was identified as a key component of physical competence. Significant differences in physical activity ability were observed between age groups (65–74 vs. 75+ years, p < 0.05). WHR was the only SFFT component significantly correlated with physical literacy. While all SPPLI measures were positively associated with increased WHR, SFFT was not a strong predictor of SPPLI. Despite declining SFFT scores with age,  perceived physical literacy remained stable. This finding highlights the need to balance subjective and objective assessments when evaluating physical literacy in older adults.

Keywords: Active aging aerobic endurance muscle function social isolation

Introduction

Physical literacy encompasses motivation, confidence, physical competence, knowledge, and understanding, fostering lifelong engagement in physical activity (Whitehead, 2013). It is rooted in philosophical frameworks such as monism, existentialism, and phenomenology, integrating aspects of psychology, cognition, sensation, behavior, and physiology (Liet al., 2022). As a multidimensional construct, physical literacy provides foundational support for participation across emotional, physical, cognitive, and behavioral domains (Cornishet al., 2020; Martinset al., 2021). For older adults, maintaining physical activity is crucial for preserving physiological, psychological, and environmental well-being (Huang & Chang, 2020). A comprehensive analysis of physical literacy in health promotion underscores its holistic framework in fostering lifelong participation in physical activity interventions (Cornishet al., 2020).

According to Taiwan’s population projections (2022–2070), the average life expectancy is expected to reach 84.7 years for men and 91.4 years for women by 2070 (National Development Council, 2022). This gender disparity highlights the need to focus on aging-related health concerns, particularly among older women, who face higher risks of chronic diseases, mobility limitations, and dependency on long-term care services. For instance, osteoporosis significantly increases fracture risk, reducing quality of life (Di Loritoet al., 2021). Additionally, socioeconomic factors exacerbate these challenges, as older women often experience higher poverty rates due to lower lifetime earnings and reduced access to retirement benefits (Shen, 2021). The intersection of physical, social, and economic disadvantages complicates the aging process for women, underscoring the necessity for gender-sensitive policies and interventions.

While previous research highlights the importance of physical literacy for health, most studies focus on children, with limited attention to older adults, particularly older women. Given the critical role of physical function in aging, enhancing physical literacy could contribute significantly to health promotion (Huanget al., 2020). Within physical literacy, physical competence—defined as proficiency in fine and gross motor skills—is particularly relevant (Hackfortet al., 2019; Robinsonet al., 2015). Motor competence is essential across the lifespan, promoting sustained engagement in physical activity and functional independence (Stoddenet al., 2008). However, research on motor competence in older adults remains scarce, with limited discussion on its assessment and impact.

This study distinguishes two key terms: competence (a core element of physical literacy) and ability (a category within physical literacy scales for older adults). Competence refers to an individual’s capacity to effectively navigate challenges and perform tasks within specific contexts. Conceptually, it encompasses knowledge, skills, abilities, and attitudes demonstrated through real-world tasks (Le Deist & Winterton, 2005). In contrast, ability denotes an individual’s fundamental aptitude for a specific action and must meet two conditions: (1) the capability must reside within the individual (e.g., hitting a ball requires sufficient skill), and (2) ability must be action-related, directly linking capacity to execution (Maier, 2010). In this study, ability pertains to accumulated physical functions over time, whereas competence refers to physical performance at the time of assessment.

Advancing research on physical literacy in older adults requires evaluating both physical function and motor competence. Several assessment tools exist, including the Senior Fitness Test (SFFT), Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), Berg Balance Scale (Gibbset al., 2014), and 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Among these, SFFT has demonstrated high reliability and provides valuable insights into physical function in older adults (Bhattacharyaet al., 2016)

In summary, this study explored the relationship between physical fitness and physical literacy among older women to promote their physical health and support healthy aging. Based on this framework, three research hypotheses are proposed.

H1: SFFT can serve as a tool to represent physical competence.

H2: SFFT can serve as a tool to predict physical literacy.

H3: Older adults in different age groups have varying levels of physical literacy.

Method

Participants

Individuals deemed unsuitable for functional fitness testing due to health conditions, such as severe heart disease and high blood pressure, as advised by their physicians to refrain from exercise, were excluded from participation. Additionally, individuals who were illiterate or had hearing impairments were also excluded. After excluding several ineligible participants, a total of 350 female older adults aged 65 years and above, residing in both urban and rural areas of southern Taiwan, were recruited for the study. The participants were approximately 74 years old, with over half having at least an elementary school education, and most living with others. The study protocol received approval from the Human Experiment and Ethics Committee of National Cheng Kung University Hospital (Approval No. A-ER-109-559).

Procedure

Participants filled out the 11-item Senior Perceived Physical Literacy Instrument (SPPLI-11). Following this, they underwent the Senior Functional Fitness Test (SFFT). The SFFT included assessments of upper muscle strength (30-second arm curl), lower muscle strength (30-second chair-to-stand), aerobic endurance (two-minute step), upper body flexibility (back scratch), lower body flexibility (chair sit-and-reach), agility, and dynamic balance (eight-foot up-and-go). Each participant’s assessment lasted approximately 40 minutes and was conducted on the same day by trained personnel.

Materials

1. Senior Perceived Physical Literacy Instrument (SPPLI)

SPPLI was developed by Liuet al. (2022). The use of SPPLI was permitted by the original author. The instrument contains 11 questions that included elements of physical literacy including “attitude”, “ability” and “sociality.” It uses a 5-point Likert scale where “1” represents “strongly disagree” and “5” means “strongly agree.” The Cronbach’s alpha for the SPPLI was 0.90. The article has been cited by nine papers.

2. Senior Functional Fitness Test

According to Sport Administration, Ministry of Education’s guidelines of Taiwan (Ministry of Education, 2018; Rikli & Jones, 2013). The test included Body Mass Index, Waist–hip ratio, 30-second chair stand test, 30-second arm curl test, 2-minute step test, back scratch test, chair sit-and-reach test and 8-foot up-and-go test, testing the body composition, upper body muscle strength and endurance, lower body muscle strength and endurance, aerobic endurance, upper body flexibility, lower body flexibility and dynamic balance.

Statistical Analysis

Initially, descriptive statistics, including proportions, means, and standard deviations, were employed to present participant characteristics such as age, height, weight, education level, and living situation. Subsequently, Pearson Correlation was utilized to analyze the correlation between Senior Perceived Physical Literacy and the Senior Functional Fitness Test. Following this, Simple regression analysis was employed to analyze the correlation between Senior Perceived Physical Literacy and specific Senior Functional Fitness Test items. Lastly, an t- test was conducted to analyze the difference in SPPLI among age groups. Microsoft Excel 2016 and SPSS v20.0 were utilized for conducting statistical analysis. The type I error was set at 0.05.

Results

1. Senior Functional Fitness Test of the Participants

According to the norms of the Taiwanese Senior Functional Fitness Test (SFTT) presented in Table I, participant’s performance levels were assessed. Participants with a below-average BMI showed higher levels of underweight. Additionally, they exhibited above-average performance in the 30-second chair stand and one-leg stance with eyes open tests. However, their performance in the waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), 30-second Arm Curl, Back Scratch, and 8-foot Up-and-go tests was categorized as below average. Lastly, participant’s performance in the 2-minute step test was average.

Item Age BMI WHR 30-second Arm Curl 30CS Back scratch test CSR 8UG One-leg stance with eyes open 2MST
Female (n = 350) Mean±SD 74.1 ± 6.7 23.7 ± 3.3 0.8 ± 0.1 16.7 ± 4.6 18.7 ± 5.8 −2.0 ± 11.7 7.1 ± 10.8 7.3 ± 2.9 30.4 ± 35.9 93.6 ± 30.4
Level (%) 30–35 10–15 30–35 75–80 15 90–95 35–40 95 60–65
Table I. Senior Functional Fitness Test of the Participants

2. Differences in SPPLI and SFFT between Groups

In this study, participants were divided into two groups: 65–74 years old and 75 years and older. A t-test was used to examine whether age differences among older adults impacted SPPLI and SFFT scores. The results showed no significant differences between the two groups in SPPLI. However, for SFFT, there were significant differences in all measures except for the waist-to-hip ratio (Table II).

Group 1 (65–74 yrs.) (n = 199) Group 2 (≧75 yrs.) (n = 151) t
SPPLL total 41.38 ± 11.388 40.19 ± 11.087 0.985
Attitude 21.11 ± 3.220 20.40 ± 4.291 1.764
Ability 14.70 ± 4.090 13.81 ± 4.322 1.969
Sociality 17.59 ± 17.426 15.17 ± 15.740 1.339
BMI 23.169 ± 3.238 23.940 ± 3.341 −2.171*
WHR 0.93 ± 0.09 0.929 ± 0.104 0.057
Arm Curl 16.78 ± 4.659 14.828 ± 4.199 4.086**
30CS 18.2 ± 5.98 15.974 ± 5.312 3.628**
Back scratch test −1.628 ± 10.888 −4.974 ± 12.386 2.682**
CSR 8.131 ± 11.234 4.510 ± 9.768 3.143**
8UG 6.312 ± 2.825 7.51 ± 2.884 −3.859**
One-leg stance with eyes open 38.844 ± 40.19 14.503 ± 22.704 6.604**
2MST 96.779 ± 24.559 82.389 ± 35.17 4.492**
Table II. Difference Characteristics and Factors between Age Groups

Based on the Health Belief Model, the researchers divided participants into two groups—those who maintained regular exercise and those who did not—for comparison in SPPLI and SFFT. As shown in Table III, there were significant differences in the total score and the attitude dimension for SPPLI. For SFFT, significant differences were also found in two items, WHR and CSR.

Non-maintenance (n = 121) Maintenance (n = 229) t
SPPLL total 39.01 ± 12.591 41.85±10.383 −2.257*
Attitude 20.22 ± 4.196 21.10 ± 3.431 −2.113*
Ability 13.75 ± 4.596 14.61 ± 3.967 −1.823
Sociality 18.22 ± 17.823 15.66 ± 16.107 1.364
BMI 23.413 ± 3.237 23.55 ± 3.340 −0.368
WHR 0.951 ± 0.075 0.919 ± 0.103 2.967*
Arm curl 15.372 ± 2.01 16.245 ± 4.293 −1.705
30CS 16.479 ± 5.596 17.646 ± 5.878 −1.796
Back scratch test −4.355 ± 12.192 −2.393 ± 11.337 −1.500
CSR 4.233 ± 10.945 7.816 ± 10.786 -2.984*
8UG 6.785 ± 3.02 6.852 ± 2.853 −0.203
One-leg stance with eyes open 25.678 ± 34.497 30.022 ± 36.650 −0.1073
2MST 89.595 ± 28.947 91.163 ± 31.157 −0.458
Table III. Difference Characteristics and Factors between Exercise Stages

3. Relationship Between Senior Functional Fitness Test Items and SPPLI Score

To investigate the relationship between SPPL and SFFT, a Pearson correlation and linear regression analysis was performed. Table IV presents the results of the regression model. The analysis indicated that regardless of the total SPPLI score or its individual domains (attitude, ability, social), only the waist-to-hip ratio showed a significant correlation.

Variable Total score (r) Attitude (r) Competence (r) Social (r)
BMI 0.041 0.064 0.058 0.046
WHR −0.264** −0.117* −0.238* 0.392**
Arm Curl 0.103 0.204** 0.119* 0.113*
30CS 0.068 0.168** 0.106* 0.118*
Back scratch 0.084 0.119* 0.114* −0.012
Sit and reach 0.075 0.160** 0.104 0.086
8UG −0.036 −0.023 −0.098 0.029
One-leg stance with eyes open 0.073 0.101 0.098 0.021
2MST 0.089 0.169** 0.160** 0.088
Model
1 B Std. Error Beta t
Constant 69.655 5.834 – 11.940
WHR −31.130 6.240 −0.264 −4.989
Table IV. Relationship between SFFT and SPPLI

Discussion

Age Stage of Female Older Adult and Senior Perceived Physical Literacy

In summary, the findings indicate that there are no significant differences in SPPL and its dimensions across different age groups, suggesting that age could not influence self-perceived physical literacy levels, attitudes, abilities, and social aspects related to physical activity.

However, according to the results of this study, among the female elderly, the older they are, the worse of their SFFT. With aging, physical functions in the human body gradually decline. A three-year longitudinal study has shown that age-related loss in skeletal muscle quantity and function is a critical determinant of independent physical functioning in later life (Trombettiet al., 2016). Another study suggests that age-associated increases in chronic diseases can lead to multisystem dysfunction and frailty in older adults (Anguloet al., 2020 #697). However, the observed discrepancies between perceived physical competence and actual physical performance test results may still be attributed to factors discussed earlier, including recall bias, social desirability effects, health condition impacts, and self-efficacy, which can result in less accurate data in subjective questionnaire responses (Bandura, 1997; Holt-Lunstadet al., 2010; Klassenet al., 2016).

Exercise Stage of Female Older Adult and Senior Perceived Physical Literacy

In this study, participants were divided into maintenance and non-maintenance groups based on exercise habits. T-test results showed a significant difference in attitude (factor 1) between groups, indicating that those who consistently engage in physical activity have a more positive attitude toward it (Almeida & Neves, 2014). This suggests that attitude influences physical activity participation (Vahedian-Shahroodiet al., 2019), which should be considered in future physical activity interventions.

Finally, the t-test showed a significant difference in the total SPPLI score between groups. Given the differences in factors 1 and the SPPLI score also varied significantly, suggesting that physical literacy in seniors impacts their level of engagement in physical activity. Higher attitude and Overall Self-Awareness correspond with greater willingness to participate in physical activity.

WHR is the Only Variable in SFFT that is Correlated with SPPLI

According to the World Health Organization (2011), the current cutoff values for waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) are set at 0.8 for women and 0.9 for men, and these thresholds are applicable across different regions. Huxleyet al. (2010) indicated that overall obesity indicators (such as BMI) and central adiposity measures (such as waist circumference, WHR, and waist-to-height ratio) are associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors and incidence. Data from the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) show that waist circumference increases with age (Fordet al., 2003). Research also reveals that among older adults, increased waist circumference (WC) is associated with a higher prevalence of hypertension (Zhanget al., 2021).

A study suggests that women should pay closer attention to weight management, particularly body fat, as this is reflected in WHR values and could further contribute to lower back pain (Youet al., 2022). From 1997 to 2000, 15,062 participants took part in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer (EPIC)-Norfolk study, where they received health screenings over these three years and were followed up for overall mortality and CVD incidence. Among women, the hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality comparing the second, third, and fourth quartiles of body fat percentage to the first (lowest) quartile were 0.91 (0.70–1.17), 0.75 (0.55–1.02), and 0.87 (0.61–1.23), respectively. The HRs for CVD incidence were 0.98 (0.82–1.17), 0.89 (0.73–1.10), and 1.02 (0.81–1.29). In contrast, higher BMI and WHR were associated with increased risk for both outcomes, with WHR being the most predictive indicator.

Senior Perceived Physical Literacy and Senior Functional Fitness Test Items

In this study, SFFT was hypothesized to predict SPPL; however, the results indicated that only WHR showed a significant correlation. This finding may be explained from two perspectives. First, SFFT may be insufficient as a predictive tool for physical literacy in older adults. Huanget al. (2020) reviewed tools for assessing physical literacy among older adults, with a focus on physical competence, identifying methods such as gait speed tests, stabilometers, postural measurement platforms, composite capacity tests, and complex capacity tests across 73 studies. However, no consensus was reached on which tool most accurately assesses physical competence in older adults. In the current study, only WHR was significantly associated with SPPL, suggesting that the methods for measuring physical competence require further investigation.

Additionally, discrepancies may exist between subjective and objective assessments of physical competence in older adults. Subjective measurements focus on evaluating individual’s conscious awareness of their own physical competence, while objective measurements quantify and assess physical abilities directly. In other words, if the aim is to evaluate physical competence from an individual’s subjective perspective in relation to a specific context, self-report tools should be utilized. Conversely, to evaluate the actual capability of physical competence, objective measurement tools should be applied (Ferreira & Saraiva, 2019). A study examining methods for measuring sedentary time in older adults found that objective methods, such as thigh-worn accelerometers, are most effective in measuring sedentary duration but do not capture types of sedentary behavior. Subjective methods, such as behavioral recall, effectively capture time and types of sedentary behaviors but have comparatively lower validity in measuring total sedentary time. Thus, subjective measurement methods may reduce measurement validity, failing to accurately reflect objective data indicators (Aguilar-Farias, 2016). This can also explain why the measurement of the scale in this study did not align with the results of SFFT regarding physical competence.

Limitations

There are limitations to this study. The majority of participants were from urban communities and had established exercise habits. As a result, the findings of this study may not be generalizable to all elderly groups, including those from rural areas, indigenous and male populations. Additionally, the study lacked diversity in recruiting older adults engaged in a variety of exercise types and intensities. This could lead to differences in the Senior Physical Literacy score, especially regarding the “sociality” element.

Conclusions

As aging progresses, SFFT scores decline among older adults, yet perceived physical literacy remains unchanged, highlighting the need to balance subjective and objective assessments. The extent to which physical fitness directly validates and reflects Self-Perceived Physical Literacy remains uncertain, particularly in this population. Long-term outcomes, such as the multifaceted effects on waist-to-hip ratio and exercise habits, warrant greater attention. Given that many older adults have had little to no exposure to SFFT or SPPLI, managing body composition over time reflects the cumulative benefits of improvements in these areas. Lifelong education and learning for older adults should also be prioritized.

References

  1. Aguilar-Farias, N. (2016). Objective and subjective methods for measuring physical activity and sedentary behaviour in older adults [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. The University of Queensland. https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:387525.
     Google Scholar
  2. Almeida, P., & Neves, R. (2014). Physical activity-the attitude of the institutionalised elderly. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 14(1), 12–15.
     Google Scholar
  3. Angulo, J., El Assar, M., Álvarez-Bustos, A., & Rodríguez-Mañas, L. (2020). Physical activity and exercise: Strategies to manage frailty. Redox Biology, 35, 101513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.redox.2020.101513.
     Google Scholar
  4. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Macmillan.
     Google Scholar
  5. Bhattacharya, P. K., Deka, K., & Royi, A. (2016). Assessment of inter-rater variability of the Senior Fitness Test in the geriatric population: A community based study. International Journal of Biomedical and Advance Research, 7(5), 208–212.
     Google Scholar
  6. Cornish, K., Fox, G., Fyfe, T., Koopmans, E., Pousette, A., & Pelletier, C. A. (2020). Understanding physical literacy in the context of health: A rapid scoping review. BMC Public Health, 20, 1–19.
     Google Scholar
  7. Di Lorito, C., Long, A., Byrne, A., Harwood, R. H., Gladman, J. R. F., Schneider, S., Logan, P., Bosco, A., & van der Wardt, V. (2021). Exercise interventions for older adults: A systematic review of meta-analyses. Journal of Sport and Health Science, 10(1), 29–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2020.06.003.
     Google Scholar
  8. Ferreira, H. A., & Saraiva, M. (2019). Subjective and objective measures. In H. Ayanoglu, & E. Duarte (Eds.), ˘ Emotional design in human-robot interaction: Theory, methods and applications (pp. 143–159). Springer.
     Google Scholar
  9. Ford, E. S., Mokdad, A. H., & Giles, W. H. (2003). Trends in waist circumference among U.S. adults. Obesity Research, 11(10), 1223–1231.
     Google Scholar
  10. Gibbs, J. C., Nattiv, A., Barrack, M. T., Williams, N. I., Rauh, M. J., Nichols, J. F., & De Souza, M. J. (2014). Low bone density risk is higher in exercising women with multiple triad risk factors. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 46(1), 167–176. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182a03b8b.
     Google Scholar
  11. Hackfort, D., Schinke, R. J., & Strauss, B. (2019). Dictionary of Sport Psychology: Sport, Exercise, and Performing Arts. Academic Press.
     Google Scholar
  12. Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., & Layton, J. B. (2010). Social relationships and mortality risk: A meta-analytic review. PLoS medicine, 7(7), e1000316.
     Google Scholar
  13. Huang, S. -W., & Chang, T. -Y. (2020). Social image impacting attitudes of middle-aged and elderly people toward the usage of walking aids: An empirical investigation in Taiwan. Healthcare, 8(4), 543. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare8040543.
     Google Scholar
  14. Huang, Y., Sum, K. R., Yang, Y. J., & Chun-Yiu Yeung, N. (2020). Measurements of older adult’s physical competence under the concept of physical literacy: A scoping review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(18), 6570. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186570.
     Google Scholar
  15. Huxley, R., Mendis, S., Zheleznyakov, E., Reddy, S., & Chan, J. (2010). Body mass index, waist circumference and waist: Hip ratio as predictors of cardiovascular risk—a review of the literature. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 64(1), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2009.68.
     Google Scholar
  16. Klassen, A. F., Cano, S. J., Alderman, A., East, C., Badia, L., Baker, S. B., Robson, S., & Pusic, A. L. (2016). Self-report scales to measure expectations and appearance-related psychosocial distress in patients seeking cosmetic treatments. Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 36(9), 1068–1078.
     Google Scholar
  17. Le Deist, F. D., & Winterton, J. (2005). What is competence? Human Resource Development International, 8(1), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/1367886042000338227.
     Google Scholar
  18. Li, M. H., Whitehead, M., Green, N., Ren, H., Cheng, C. F., Lin, L. L., Lin, C. P., Liu, Y., Wen, X., Lei, S. M., Li, H., Shy, D. Y., Tang, Y., Choi, S. M., Huang, Y., Ma, R., Wang, F. J., Chen, S., Sum, R. K. (2022). Operationally defining physical literacy in Chinese culture: Results of a meta-narrative synthesis and the Panel’s recommendations. Journal of Exercise Science & Fitness, 20(3), 236–248.
     Google Scholar
  19. Liu, C. -Y., Lin, L. L. -C., Sheu, J. -J., & Sum, R. K. -W. (2022). Psychometric validation of senior perceived physical literacy instrument. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(11), 6726.
     Google Scholar
  20. Maier, J. (2010). Abilities. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/abilities/.
     Google Scholar
  21. Martins, J., Onofre, M., Mota, J., Murphy, C., Repond, R. -M., Vost, H., Cremosini, B., Svrdlim, A., Markovic, M., Dudley, D. (2021). International approaches to the definition, philosophical tenets, and core elements of physical literacy: A scoping review. PROSPECTS, 50(1), 13–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09466-1.
     Google Scholar
  22. Ministry of Education. (2018). Regulation for the implementation of national fitness testing. Ministry of education of the Republic of China. https://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/LawContent.aspx?id=GL000769.
     Google Scholar
  23. National Development Council. (2022). Opulation projections for the R.O.C. (Taiwan): 2022–2070. National Development Council of the Republic of China. https://pop-proj.ndc.gov.tw/main_en/News_Content.aspx?n=139&s=59.
     Google Scholar
  24. Rikli, R. E., & Jones, C. J. (2013). Senior fitness test manual. 2nd ed. Human Kinetics.
     Google Scholar
  25. Robinson, L. E., Stodden, D. F., Barnett, L. M., Lopes, V. P., Logan, S. W., Rodrigues, L. P., & D’Hondt, E. (2015). Motor competence and its effect on positive developmental trajectories of health. Sports Medicine, 45(9), 1273–1284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-015-0351-6.
     Google Scholar
  26. Shen, J. (2021). Policy exploration of household labor redistribution: Reflections on the issue of “elderly women’s poverty” in Japan. Collection of Women’s Studies, 1(1), 70.
     Google Scholar
  27. Stodden, D. F., Goodway, J. D., Langendorfer, S. J., Roberton, M. A., Rudisill, M. E., Garcia, C., & Garcia, L. E. (2008). A Developmental perspective on the role of motor skill competence in physical activity: An emergent relationship. Quest, 60(2), 290–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2008.10483582.
     Google Scholar
  28. Trombetti, A., Reid, K. F., Hars, M., Herrmann, F. R., Pasha, E., Phillips, E. M., & Fielding, R. A. (2016). Age-associated declines in muscle mass, strength, power, and physical performance: Impact on fear of falling and quality of life. Osteoporosis International, 27(2), 463–471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-015-3236-5.
     Google Scholar
  29. Vahedian-Shahroodi, M., Moshki, M., Esmaily, H., Moradi Gholezo, S., Lael- Monfared, E., & Damirchi, M. (2019). Predicting the intention to perform physical activity in the elderly based on the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Research and Health, 9(4), 324–329. https://doi.org/10.29252/jrh.9.4.324.
     Google Scholar
  30. Whitehead, M. (2013). The History and Development of Physical Literacy. International Council of Sport Science and Physical Education (ICSSPE).
     Google Scholar
  31. World Health Organization (2011). Waist Circumference and Waist-hip Ratio: Report of a WHO Expert Consultation. World Health Organization.
     Google Scholar
  32. Wu, M. -C., & Jhan, J. -F. (2015). 104-year the conclusion of the evaluation study on the functional physical fitness of the elderly in Taiwan Chung Yuan Christian University [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Chung Yuan Christian University.
     Google Scholar
  33. You, Q., Jiang, Q., Li, D., Wang, T., Wang, S., & Cao, S. (2022). Waist circumference, waist-hip ratio, body fat rate, total body fat mass and risk of low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis. European Spine Journal, 31(1), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-021-06994-y.
     Google Scholar
  34. Zhang, W., He, K., Zhao, H., Hu, X., Yin, C., Zhao, X., & Shi, S. (2021). Association of body mass index and waist circumference with high blood pressure in older adults. BMC Geriatr, 21(1), 260. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-021-02154-5.
     Google Scholar