Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32516995›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Timed Up and Go and Six-Minute Walking Tests with Wearable Inertial Sensor: One Step Further for the Prediction of the Risk of Fall in Elderly Nursing Home People.

Fabien Buisseret, Louis Catinus, Rémi Grenard, Laurent Jojczyk, Dylan Fievez, Vincent Barvaux, Frédéric Dierick

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
18.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Fall Risk Management in Nursing Homes: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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.

Fabien BuisseretCentre de Recherche et de Formation (CeREF), Chaussée de Binche 159, 7000 Mons, Belgium.
Louis CatinusCentre de Recherche et de Formation (CeREF), Chaussée de Binche 159, 7000 Mons, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-0040-7954
Rémi GrenardCentre de Recherche et de Formation (CeREF), Chaussée de Binche 159, 7000 Mons, Belgium.
Laurent JojczykCentre de Recherche et de Formation (CeREF), Chaussée de Binche 159, 7000 Mons, Belgium.
Dylan FievezCentre de Recherche et de Formation (CeREF), Chaussée de Binche 159, 7000 Mons, Belgium.
Vincent BarvauxCentre de Recherche et de Formation (CeREF), Chaussée de Binche 159, 7000 Mons, Belgium.
Frédéric DierickCentre de Recherche et de Formation (CeREF), Chaussée de Binche 159, 7000 Mons, Belgium.
Directorate-General Joint Research Centre · BEHaute École Louvain en Hainaut · BELaboratoire National de Santé · LUUniversity of Mons · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Assessing the risk of fall in elderly people is a difficult challenge for clinicians. Since falls represent one of the first causes of death in such people, numerous clinical tests have been created and validated over the past 30 years to ascertain the risk of falls. More recently, the developments of low-cost motion capture sensors have facilitated observations of gait differences between fallers and nonfallers. The aim of this study is twofold. First, to design a method combining clinical tests and motion capture sensors in order to optimize the prediction of the risk of fall. Second to assess the ability of artificial intelligence to predict risk of fall from sensor raw data only. Seventy-three nursing home residents over the age of 65 underwent the Timed Up and Go (TUG) and six-minute walking tests equipped with a home-designed wearable Inertial Measurement Unit during two sets of measurements at a six-month interval. Observed falls during that interval enabled us to divide residents into two categories: fallers and nonfallers. We show that the TUG test results coupled to gait variability indicators, measured during a six-minute walking test, improve (from 68% to 76%) the accuracy of risk of fall's prediction at six months. In addition, we show that an artificial intelligence algorithm trained on the sensor raw data of 57 participants reveals an accuracy of 75% on the remaining 16 participants.

Indexed as

Accidental FallsWearable Electronic DevicesAgedArtificial IntelligenceFemaleGaitHumansMaleNursing HomesRisk AssessmentWalkingclinical testselderlygait variabilityrisk of fallwearable sensor

Identifiers

PMID32516995
PMCPMC7309155
OpenAlexW3033755023

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.