ReviewmHealth2021
Objective falls-risk prediction using wearable technologies amongst patients with and without neurogenic gait alterations: a narrative review of clinical feasibility.
Review in mHealth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical evaluation of fall risk in older adults who use lower-limb prostheses: A scoping review.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe present narrative review aims to collate the literature regarding the current use of wearable gait measurement devices for falls-risk assessment in neurological and non-neurological populations. Thereby, this review seeks to determine the extent to which the aforementioned barriers inhibit clinical use.
backgroundFalls contribute a significant disease burden in most western countries, resulting in increased morbidity and mortality with substantial therapeutic costs. The recent development of gait analysis sensor technologies has enabled quantitative measurement of several gait features related to falls risk. However, three main barriers to implementation exist: accurately measuring gait-features associated with falls, differentiating between fallers and non-fallers using these gait features, and the accuracy of falls predictive algorithms developed using these gait measurements.
methodsSearches of Medline, PubMed, Embase and Scopus were screened to identify 46 articles relevant to the present study. Studies performing gait assessment using any wearable gait assessment device and analysing correlation with the occurrence of falls during a retrospective or prospective study period were included. Risk of Bias was assessed using the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (CEBM) Criteria.
conclusionsFalls prediction algorithms based entirely, or in-part, on gait data have shown comparable or greater success of predicting falls than existing stratification scoring systems such as the 10-meter walk test or timed-up-and-go. However, data is lacking regarding their accuracy in neurological patient populations. Inertial measurement units (IMU) have displayed competency in obtaining and interpreting gait metrics relevant to falls risk. They have the potential to enhance the accuracy and efficiency of falls risk assessment in inpatient and outpatient setting.
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.