Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34758785›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2021

Key factor cutoffs and interval reference values for stratified fall risk assessment in community-dwelling older adults: the role of physical fitness, body composition, physical activity, health condition, and environmental hazards.

Catarina Pereira, Guida Veiga, Gabriela Almeida, Ana Rita Matias, Ana Cruz-Ferreira, Felismina Mendes, Jorge Bravo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Catarina PereiraDepartamento de Desporto e Saúde, Escola de Saúde e Desenvolvimento Humano, Universidade de Évora, Largo dos Colegiais 2, Évora, Portugal. clnp@uevora.pt.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8111-1455
Guida VeigaDepartamento de Desporto e Saúde, Escola de Saúde e Desenvolvimento Humano, Universidade de Évora, Largo dos Colegiais 2, Évora, Portugal.
Gabriela AlmeidaDepartamento de Desporto e Saúde, Escola de Saúde e Desenvolvimento Humano, Universidade de Évora, Largo dos Colegiais 2, Évora, Portugal.
Ana Rita MatiasDepartamento de Desporto e Saúde, Escola de Saúde e Desenvolvimento Humano, Universidade de Évora, Largo dos Colegiais 2, Évora, Portugal.
Ana Cruz-FerreiraDepartamento de Desporto e Saúde, Escola de Saúde e Desenvolvimento Humano, Universidade de Évora, Largo dos Colegiais 2, Évora, Portugal.
Felismina MendesComprehensive Health Research Centre (CHRC), Universidade de Évora, Largo dos Colegiais 2, Évora, Portugal.
Jorge BravoDepartamento de Desporto e Saúde, Escola de Saúde e Desenvolvimento Humano, Universidade de Évora, Largo dos Colegiais 2, Évora, Portugal.
University of Évora · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFall risk assessment and determination of older adults' individual risk profiles are crucial elements in fall prevention. As such, it is essential to establish cutoffs and reference values for high and low risk according to key risk factor outcomes. This study main objective was to determine the key physical fitness, body composition, physical activity, health condition and environmental hazard risk outcome cutoffs and interval reference values for stratified fall risk assessment in community-dwelling older adults.

methodsFive-hundred community-dwelling Portuguese older adults (72.2 ± 5.4 years) were assessed for falls, physical fitness, body composition, physical (in) activity, number of health conditions and environmental hazards, and sociodemographic characteristics.

resultsThe established key outcomes and respective cutoffs and reference values used for fall risk stratification were multidimensional balance (low risk: score > 33, moderate risk: score 32-33, high risk: score 30-31, and very high: score < 30); lean body mass (low risk: > 44 kg, moderate risk: 42-44 kg, high risk: 39-41 kg, and very high: < 39 kg); fat body mass (low risk: < 37%, moderate risk: 37-38%, high risk: 39-42%, and very high: > 42%); total physical activity (low risk: > 2800 Met-min/wk., moderate risk: 2300-2800 Met-min/wk., high risk: 1900-2300 Met-min/wk., and very high: < 1900 Met-min/wk); rest period weekdays (low risk: < 4 h/day, moderate risk: 4-4.4 h/day, high risk: 4.5-5 h/day, and very high: > 5 h/day); health conditions (low risk: n < 3, moderate risk: n = 3, high risk: n = 4-5, and very high: n > 5); and environmental hazards (low risk: n < 5, moderate risk: n = 5, high risk: n = 6-8, and very high: n > 8).

conclusionsAssessment of community-dwelling older adults' fall risk should focus on the above outcomes to establish individual older adults' fall risk profiles. Moreover, the design of fall prevention interventions should manage a person's identified risks and take into account the determined cutoffs and respective interval values for fall risk stratification.

Indexed as

Accidental FallsIndependent LivingAgedBody CompositionExerciseHumansPhysical FitnessReference ValuesRisk AssessmentCutoffsElderlyFallingRisk assessmentRisk stratification

Identifiers

PMID34758785
PMCPMC8582090
OpenAlexW3213771595

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.