ArticleAging clinical and experimental research2022
Gender differentiated score on the Falls Efficacy Scale International (FES-I Brazil) to assess self-efficacy in falls in community-dwelling older adults.
Article in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neuromotor frailty phenotype and fall risk in geriatrics with knee osteoarthritis: a cross-sectional analysis of physical therapy performance and psychometric outcomes.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Yearlong Evaluation of Fall Risk Determinants Among 40 Older Adults in Two Residential Assisted Living Facilities.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
- The Role of Periarticular Knee Muscle Torques in Ensuring the Body Balance of Older Adults with Balance Disturbances.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Cognition, fear, and falls: psychological predictors of balance impairment in community-dwelling older adults.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince fear of falling is associated with a history of falls and is more prevalent in women, it is important to define cut-off points differentiated between genders on the Falls Efficacy Scale International Brazil (FES-I Brazil) to implement early prevention and/or rehabilitation strategies.
aimsTo determine cut-off points on the FES-I Brazil differentiated between genders which discriminate falls and verify their association with the history of falls.
methodsThis was a cross-sectional study including 306 community-dwelling older adults. Fear of falling score from the FES-I Brazil was the independent variable and the outcome was the history of falls in the last 12 months. The cut-off points differentiated between genders were established according to sensitivity and specificity values evaluated by the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves (ROC). The multivariable logistic regression was used to verify the association between fear of falling and history of falls.
resultsThe cut-off points on the FES-I Brazil to discriminate falls were > 25 points [AUC: 0.67 (95% CI 0.59-0.73)] for women, and > 19 points [AUC: 0.66 (95% CI 0.57-0.74) for men, suggesting that women present a greater fear of falling than men, due to the higher cut-off point found for women. Women and men with fear of falling, respectively, had 2.14 (95% CI 1.11-4.13) and 2.62 (95% CI 1.10-6.85) higher odds of suffering falls compared to those without this condition.
conclusionsThe FES-I can be used to discriminate falls in the elderly and shows that women have a higher cut-off point than men on the scale.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35050494What 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.