ArticlePloS one2019
Reliability and construct validity of the stepping-forward affordance perception test for fall risk assessment in community-dwelling older adults.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the benefits of a psychomotor intervention mediated by creative dance in community-dwelling older adults: development of new coordination and rhythm tests.BMC public health · 2025Trial
- Can two multimodal psychomotor exercise programs improve attention, affordance perception, and balance in community dwellings at risk of falling? A randomized controlled trial.BMC public health · 2022Trial
- Older adults do not consistently overestimate their action opportunities across different settings.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Aging safely in Alentejo - understanding for action - preventing falls and violence against older people: study rationale, aims, design, and preliminary results.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Development and validation of a continuous fall risk score in community-dwelling older people: an ecological approach.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Article
- Crossing the Gap: Older Adults Do Not Create Less Challenging Stepping Stone Configurations Than Young Adults.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Thus far, few studies have examined the estimation and actual performance of locomotor ability in older adults. To our knowledge, there are no studies examining the relationship between stepping-forward estimation versus ability and fall occurrence. The aim of this study was to develop and assess the reliability and validity of a new test for fall risk assessment in community-dwelling older adults. In total, 347 participants (73.1 ± 6.2 years; 266 women) were assessed for their perception of maximum distance for the stepping-forward and action boundary. The test was developed following the existing literature and expert opinions. The task showed strong internal consistency. Intraclass correlation ranged from 0.99 to 1 for intrarater agreement and from 0.83 to 0.97 for interrater agreement. Multivariate binary regression analysis models revealed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.665 (95% CI: 0.608-0.723) for fallers and 0.728 (95% CI: 0.655-0.797) for recurrent fallers. The stepping-forward affordance perception test (SF-APT) was demonstrated to be accurate, reliable and valid for fall risk assessment. The results showed that a large estimated stepping-forward associated with an underestimated absolute error works as a protective mechanism for fallers and recurrent fallers in community-dwelling older adults. SF-APT is safe, quick, easy to administer, well accepted and reproducible for application in community or clinical settings by either clinical or nonclinical care professionals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.