Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28575126›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Gait dynamics to optimize fall risk assessment in geriatric patients admitted to an outpatient diagnostic clinic.

Lisette H J Kikkert, Maartje H de Groot, Jos P van Campen, Jos H Beijnen, Tibor Hortobágyi, Nicolas Vuillerme, Claudine C J Lamoth

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Lisette H J KikkertUniversity of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Center for Human Movement Sciences, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4977-9126
Maartje H de GrootMC Slotervaart Hospital, Department of Geriatric Medicine, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jos P van CampenMC Slotervaart Hospital, Department of Geriatric Medicine, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jos H BeijnenMC Slotervaart Hospital, Department of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Tibor HortobágyiUniversity of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Center for Human Movement Sciences, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Nicolas VuillermeUniv. Grenoble Alpes, EA AGEIS, Grenoble, France.
Claudine C J LamothUniversity of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Center for Human Movement Sciences, Groningen, The Netherlands.
University Medical Center Groningen · NLSlotervaartziekenhuis · NLInstitut Universitaire de France · FRUtrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fall prediction in geriatric patients remains challenging because the increased fall risk involves multiple, interrelated factors caused by natural aging and/or pathology. Therefore, we used a multi-factorial statistical approach to model categories of modifiable fall risk factors among geriatric patients to identify fallers with highest sensitivity and specificity with a focus on gait performance. Patients (n = 61, age = 79; 41% fallers) underwent extensive screening in three categories: (1) patient characteristics (e.g., handgrip strength, medication use, osteoporosis-related factors) (2) cognitive function (global cognition, memory, executive function), and (3) gait performance (speed-related and dynamic outcomes assessed by tri-axial trunk accelerometry). Falls were registered prospectively (mean follow-up 8.6 months) and one year retrospectively. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) on 11 gait variables was performed to determine underlying gait properties. Three fall-classification models were then built using Partial Least Squares-Discriminant Analysis (PLS-DA), with separate and combined analyses of the fall risk factors. PCA identified 'pace', 'variability', and 'coordination' as key properties of gait. The best PLS-DA model produced a fall classification accuracy of AUC = 0.93. The specificity of the model using patient characteristics was 60% but reached 80% when cognitive and gait outcomes were added. The inclusion of cognition and gait dynamics in fall classification models reduced misclassification. We therefore recommend assessing geriatric patients' fall risk using a multi-factorial approach that incorporates patient characteristics, cognition, and gait dynamics.

Indexed as

Ambulatory Care FacilitiesGaitPatient AdmissionAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMalePrincipal Component AnalysisProspective StudiesRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID28575126
PMCPMC5456316
OpenAlexW2621399005

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.