ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2021
Diabetes and Reactive Balance: Quantifying Stepping Thresholds With a Simple Spring Scale to Measure Fall-Risk in Ambulatory Older Adults.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of the Effect of Physical Rehabilitation on Balance in People with Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy Who are at Risk of Falling.Clinical interventions in aging · 2024Pooled it
- Postural threat influences reactive stepping characteristics at the single-step threshold, but not when a step is necessary.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- Article
- Dopamine-mediated improvements of the step threshold task in Parkinson's disease: validation against clinical measures of motor and cognitive function.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Falls and associated risk factors in a sample of old age population in Egyptian community.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFall-risk assessments for patients with diabetes fail to consider reactive responses to balance loss. The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of using a simple clinical tool to evaluate the impact of diabetes and fall history on reactive balance in older adults.
methodsWe recruited 72 older adults with and without diabetes. Postural perturbations were applied by a waist-mounted spring scale. Stepping thresholds (STs) in the anterior and posterior directions were defined as the lowest spring-loads that induced a step. Balance was assessed via the National Institutes of Health Toolbox Standing Balance Test, and lower extremity sensation was assessed using vibratory perception threshold and Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments. Fall history over the past year was self-reported. Cox regressions and analysis of variance were used to compare hazard rates for stepping and observed STs between groups.
resultsAnterior STs were elicited in 42 subjects and posterior STs in 65 subjects. Hazard rates for posterior ST were significantly affected by diabetes, with greater hazards for fallers with diabetes versus control fallers and nonfallers, after accounting for balance and sensory loss. For those who stepped, ST was lower in the posterior direction for the diabetes group. Additionally, anterior but not posterior ST was lower in all fallers vs all nonfallers.
conclusionsThe waist-mounted spring scale is a clinically implementable device that can assess ST in older adults with diabetes. Using the device, we demonstrated that ST was affected by diabetes and could potentially serve as a fall-risk factor independent of balance or sensory loss.
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.