Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37102969›Full record

ReviewGeriatrics (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Health Consequences of Falls among Older Adults in India: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Isha Biswas, Busola Adebusoye, Kaushik Chattopadhyay

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

3 authors.

Isha BiswasLifespan and Population Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG5 1PB, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4930-8084
Busola AdebusoyeLifespan and Population Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG5 1PB, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8170-2236
Kaushik ChattopadhyayLifespan and Population Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG5 1PB, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3235-8168

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research has been conducted on the prevalence of health consequences of falls among older adults (aged ≥60 years) in India, and our systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthe-size the existing evidence on this topic. The JBI guideline was followed for conducting this review work. Several databases were searched, and eight studies were included. The critical appraisal scores ("yes" responses) for the included studies ranged from 56% to 78%. Among older adults in India who fell, the pooled prevalence of injuries was 65.63% (95% confidence interval [38.89, 87.96]). Similarly, head and/or neck injuries was 7.55% (4.26, 11.62), upper extremity injuries was 19.42% (16.06, 23.02), trunk injuries was 9.98% (2.01, 22.47), lower extremity injuries was 34.36% (24.07, 45.44), cuts, lacerations, abrasions, grazes, bruises and/or contusions was 37.95% (22.15, 55.16), fractures was 12.50% (7.65, 18.30), dislocations and/or sprains was 14.31% (6.03, 25.26), loss of consciousness was 5.96% (0.75, 15.08), disabilities was 10.79% (7.16, 15.02), and hospital admissions was 19.68% (15.54, 24.16). Some of the high figures indicate the need for prioritizing and addressing the problem. Furthermore, high-quality studies on this topic should be conducted, including on psychological health consequences, health-related quality of life, length of hospital stay, and death. PROSPERO registration: CRD42022332903.

Indexed as

fallshealth consequencesIndiameta-analysisolder adultssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37102969
PMCPMC10137587

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.