Background: Intrinsic capacity (IC) includes all mental and physical capacities that an individual can draw on. It is categorized into five main areas: cognition, vitality, sensory, locomotion, and psychological. Improving and maintaining IC is crucial for positive and healthy aging. Currently, there is no consensus on validated, multidimensional instruments for assessing IC across the adult lifespan [1].

Objectives: To review assessment instruments used to evaluate IC domains in adults, focusing on their relevance to individual clinical practice and their validity.

Methods: This scoping review followed PRISMA-ScR guidelines and included publications from January 1, 2022, to May 7, 2025, investigating IC assessment instruments in adults. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. Study selection and data charting were conducted independently by two reviewers. Backward reference searching of relevant systematic and scoping reviews was also performed to identify additional eligible studies. The Multidisciplinary International Positive Ageing Group (MIPAG) experts scored all identified tools according to 5 predefined criteria: scientific validity, clinical relevance, usability in clinical practice, usability for patients’ self-assessment, and suitability for those aged <60 years.

Results: Of the 8828 identified studies, 46 were included in the final analysis. Most studies focused on only one domain (32 out of 46), with the most studied domains being psychological (n=24), locomotor (n=19), cognitive (n=15), and vitality (n=14). The sensory domain was assessed in three studies, but was never evaluated alone and was only included in studies covering all five domains of intrinsic capacities. Only one publication was gender-specific, concentrating on women. Very few studies (8 out of 46) involved populations with a mean age below 60 years. The experts evaluated 61 instruments. Only the Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) and EuroQol-5D achieved the maximum score (25/25), indicating consistently high scientific validity, clinical relevance, and usability across different settings. In the cognitive domains, tools such as the Multifactorial Memory Questionnaire 9-item (MMQ-9), Risk-prediction nomogram, and Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition (BASIC) achieved the highest total scores. Locomotor and vitality tools generally showed moderate performance. Only the Brief Physical Activity Assessment Tool and the Social Ecological Model-based Inventory of Physical Activity Barriers Scale (IPAB) had scores over 20/25 in the locomotor and vitality domains, respectively. The Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) (25/25), the Perceived Social Support Questionnaire (F-SozU K-6) - Brief form (6 items) (24/25), and the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) (22.5/25) were the three best-evaluated tools in the psychosocial domain. Sensory functions assessment tools displayed greater variability, with the Frisby Stereo Test showing notably lower scores (10.5/25) than the others. At the same time, the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly Screening (HHIE-S) had the highest score (18.5/25). EuroQol-5D, Centre of Excellence on Longevity Self-Administered (CESAM) Questionnaire, and Comprehensive Frailty Assessment Instrument (CFAI) were the best performers in the multidomains category.

Conclusions: Although interest in IC is growing, there is still no agreement on standardized assessments. Only a few tools are practical and validated for people under 60. Gaps remain in the evaluation of the sensory domain. Our findings highlight the need to develop an IC instrument that is relevant and user-friendly to assess all aspects of IC early, before age 60.

REFERENCES: [1] Henrotin Y, Duque S, Diraçoglu D, Franco G, Briganti G, Longe S, Piotrowicz K, Jentoft AJC, Cederholm T, Ortiz LA. A narrative review and expert consensus on barriers, facilitators, and research gaps to healthy and positive ageing - Position of the Multidisciplinary International Positive Ageing Group (MIPAG). Ageing Res Rev. 2025 Dec;112:102847. DOI: 10.1016/j.arr.2025.102847. Epub 2025 Aug 5. PMID: 40754294.

Acknowledgments: NIL.

Disclosure of Interest: Yves Henrotin Laboratoires Expanscience, Laboratoires Expanscience, Laboratoires Expanscience, Luis Aguera Laboratoires Expanscience, Laboratoires Expanscience, Giovanni Briganti Laboratoires Expanscience, Laboratoires Expanscience, Tommy Cederholm: None declared, Demirhan Diracoglu laboratoires Expanscience, Laboratoires Expanscience, Gianni Franco laboratoires Expanscience, Laboratoires Expanscience, Alfonso Jose Cruz-Jentoft: None declared, Karolina Piotrowicz: None declared, Sandrina Vandenput: None declared, Sofia Duque laboratoire Expanscience, laboratoires Expanscience.