ArticleBMJ open2023
Fear of falling: scoping review and topic analysis protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFear of falling (FoF) is a major challenge for the quality of life among older adults. Despite extensive work in previous scoping and systematic reviews on separate domains of FoF and interventions related to FoF, very little attention has been devoted to a comprehensive scoping review mapping the range and scope of this burgeoning area of study, with only a few exceptions. This scoping review aims to provide an overarching review mapping FoF research by identifying main topics, gaps in the literature and potential opportunities for bridging different strains of research on FoF. Such a comprehensive scoping review will allow the subsequent creation of an interdisciplinary theoretical and empirical framework, which may help push forward policy and practice innovations for people living with FoF. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Following the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR), seven main databases will be searched from 2000 to the date of the start of the review: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Scopus and Web of Science. The review will include original research in English, published between 2000 and January 2023. Quality checks will be conducted collegially. Data will be extracted and analysed using PRISMA-ScR charting tools and conventions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is required for the review. The results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at academic conferences. The outcomes will be disseminated through social media, opinion pieces and science communication platforms to reach a wider audience. REGISTRATION: The scoping review was registered with the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/gyzjq).
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.