Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32899201›Full record

ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Diagnostic Balance Tests for Assessing Risk of Falls and Distinguishing Older Adult Fallers and Non-Fallers: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Žiga Kozinc, Stefan Löfler, Christian Hofer, Ugo Carraro, Nejc Šarabon

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
14.1field-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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Bone Mineral Density and the Risk of Fracture According to eGFR in Postmenopausal Women.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Žiga KozincFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Primorska, Polje 42, SI-6310 Izola, Slovenia.
Stefan LöflerPhysiko- & Rheumatherapie, Institute for Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 3100 St. Pölten, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-6592-0663
Christian HoferLudwig Boltzmann Institute for Rehabilitation Research, Neugebäudeplatz 1, 3100 St. Pölten, Austria.
Ugo CarraroDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, University of Padova, Via Ugo Bassi, 58/B, 35131 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0924-4998
Nejc ŠarabonFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Primorska, Polje 42, SI-6310 Izola, Slovenia.
Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Cancer Research · ATUniversity of Primorska · SIUniversity of Padua · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Falls are a major cause of injury and morbidity in older adults. To reduce the incidence of falls, a systematic assessment of the risk of falling is of paramount importance. The purpose of this systematic review was to provide a comprehensive comparison of the diagnostic balance tests used to predict falls and for distinguishing older adults with and without a history of falls. We conducted a systematic review of the studies in which instrumented (force plate body sway assessment) or other non-instrumented balance tests were used. We analyzed the data from 19 prospective and 48 retrospective/case-control studies. Among the non-instrumented tests, the single-leg stance test appears to be the most promising for discrimination between fallers and non-fallers. In terms of body sway measures, the center-of-pressure area was most consistently associated with falls. No evidence was found for increased benefit of the body sway test when cognitive tasks were added, or the vision was eliminated. While our analyses are limited due to the unbalanced representation of different test and outcome measures across studies, we can recommend the single-leg test for the assessment of the risk of falling, and the measurements of body sway for a more comprehensive assessment.

Indexed as

body swayfall historyfallsfunctional reacholder adultsRomberg testsingle-leg test

Identifiers

PMID32899201
PMCPMC7554797
OpenAlexW3081857912

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.