Key numbers
6,141
Reference sample size
15
Age intervals in reference
What Systematic recommends
Where to start
- Use a stable surface around standard household-chair height.
- Stand with your feet about shoulder-width apart and parallel.
- Keep your feet flat on the ground throughout the movement.
- Take approximately 3 seconds to lower, pause briefly at the bottom for about 1 second, and take approximately 3 seconds to return to standing.
Condensed from the published Development Pathway (The Sitting-Rising Test: Counterbalance Tempo Target Squat). This is a starting point, not a training program or medical advice.
Where the reference scores come from
Araújo and colleagues (2020) derived sex- and age-reference scores for the Sitting-Rising Test from 6,141 non-athlete adults. They scored everyone on the same 0 to 10 scale the test uses, so the published figures can be read directly against a Sitting-Rising Test score.
It is the direct reference source for how scores are spread by age and sex. A reference score is context: it describes how other adults scored, not how healthy any one person is.
How the reference is organized
Men and women have separate distributions. Each is split into 15 five-year age groups, and within each group the scores are divided into quartiles, the four bands that each hold a quarter of the people tested.
Published reference quartile boundaries, selected age groups (Araújo 2020)
| Age (years) | Men: lowest quarter up to | Men: top quarter from | Women: lowest quarter up to | Women: top quarter from |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21-25 | 8.5 | not separable | 9.0 | not separable |
| 31-35 | 8.0 | 10.0 | 8.5 | not separable |
| 41-45 | 7.5 | 10.0 | 8.0 | not separable |
| 51-55 | 7.0 | 9.0 | 7.0 | 9.5 |
| 61-65 | 6.0 | 8.5 | 5.0 | 8.5 |
| 71-75 | 2.5 | 8.0 | 1.0 | 6.0 |
| 81-85 | not separable | 5.5 | not separable | 2.5 |
Sitting-Rising Test points (0 to 10). 'Lowest quarter' is the highest score that still fell in the bottom quarter of the published reference; 'top quarter' is the lowest score that reached the top quarter. 'Not separable' means ties at the floor or ceiling left no distinct quarter there. These are the paper's distributions, not Systematic colors, and the paper did not test Systematic's separately scored left- and right-foot-forward attempts. Every age and sex group, with the Systematic categories, is on the Sitting-Rising standards page.
How Systematic uses it
Systematic maps the published quartiles onto its own categories: the lowest quarter is red, the middle two are yellow, and the top quarter is green. Red, yellow and green are Systematic standards built on this reference, not clinical cut-offs the study published, and the full age-by-sex table of Systematic categories is on the Sitting-Rising standards page.
Because many people share the same scores, the quarters do not always form four distinct score ranges. In some younger groups, for example women aged 16 to 20 and men aged 21 to 25, the published data do not separate a top quarter, so there is no green Systematic standard boundary for those groups, and none is invented.
The evidence
Each cited source is labeled according to how it supports the particular claim on this page. Direct test evidence, underlying-capacity findings and population reference values are distinguished from Systematic-defined protocols and standards. Historical development notes are retained internally rather than presented as public evidence. A study of an underlying capacity is never presented as validation of the Systematic test itself.
-
Normative/reference evidence
Araújo et al. (2020; published online 2019). Sitting–rising test: Sex- and age-reference scores derived from 6141 adults. European Journal of Preventive Cardiology.
What it found. Sex- and age-reference scores for the Sitting-Rising Test from 6,141 adults, on the test's 0 to 10 scale, in 15 five-year age groups with quartile bands for men and women separately.
What it does not show. It describes how other adults scored. It does not set Systematic's red, yellow or green bands, and a score against it is not a diagnosis or a lifespan prediction.
The Systematic Healthspan Assessment is a physical baseline. It is not a diagnosis, and it does not estimate a biological age, a disease risk or a lifespan.