This study examines the gender-specific determinants of the components of frailty in a community-dwelling setting in India. Using data from the Longitudinal Ageing Study in India (LASI) Wave-1, this study employed 30,978 (14,885 male and 16,093 female) older adults (aged 60+) to fulfil the study objective. The modified Fried frailty phenotype criteria defines frailty by the five components: exhaustion, weak grip strength, slow walking speed, unintentional weight loss, and low physical activity. The result showed grip strength (79.1%) as the most discriminant component among males, and physical activity (81.6%) as the most discriminant component among females. The results also indicated that grip strength (male: 98.0%, female: 93.5%) and physical activity (male: 94.8%, female: 96.9%) showed a sensitivity of more than 90%, which appears to be a good indicator of frailty. Combining this dual marker increased the accuracy to 99.97% among male and 99.98% among female samples. The findings suggested adding grip strength and physical activity as a proxy measure of frailty, which can increase the precision of screening without a large additional investment of time, training, or cost.

Ageism and ableism significantly affect the well-being, social inclusion, and access to resources of older adults, often shaped by socio-cultural factors, yet remain underexplored within the heterogeneous context of India. This study examines the prevalence and associated factors of ageism, ableism, and their intersection among older adults in India. Utilizing data from the Longitudinal Aging Study in India (LASI) Wave 1, this study analyzed responses from 30,728 community-dwelling older adults (aged 60 +) across all states and union territories. Participants were categorized into four groups: ageism, ableism, intersection, or none, based on their everyday experiences of discrimination related to age, physical disability, or both. Multinomial logistic regression identified sociodemographic factors associated with these discriminations, with the cumulative advantage/disadvantage theory serving as conceptual framework. The weighted prevalence of ageism was 10.3 %, ableism was 0.5 %, and 0.4 % reported both. Men were more likely to report ableism (AOR2.66) and intersectional discrimination (AOR2.03) but less likely to report ageism (AOR 0.89). Increasing age (AOR 1.24) and lower education (AOR1.48) were associated with ageism, while unemployment was linked to ableism (AOR2.07) and intersectional discrimination (AOR 2.21). Notably, participants in poorer health were more likely to report ageism (AOR 1.29), ableism (AOR 3.15), and intersectional discrimination (AOR 5.14) based on the Healthy Aging Index, compared to healthier participants. The findings highlight how different factors shape experiences of discrimination, underscoring the importance of adopting both individual and intersectional perspectives to effectively address these issues and design targeted interventions.