ArticleCanadian geriatrics journal : CGJ2023
The Effect of a Standing Intervention on Falls in Long Term Care: a Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Canadian geriatrics journal : CGJ, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions for preventing falls in older people in care facilities.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- The relationship between accelerometer-based physical activity, sedentary behavior, and seven common geriatric syndromes: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Older adults in long term care (LTC) spend over 90% of their day engaging in sedentary behaviour. Sedentary behaviour may exacerbate functional decline and frailty, increasing the risk for falls. The purpose of this study is to explore the impact of a 22-week standing intervention on falls among LTC residents at 12-month follow-up. Methods: This was a planned secondary analysis of the Stand if You Can randomized controlled trial. The original trial randomized 95 participants (n = 47 control; n = 48 intervention) to either a sitting control or a supervised standing intervention group (100 minutes/week) for 22 weeks. Falls data were available to be collected over 12 months post-intervention for 89 participants. The primary outcome was a hazard of fall (Yes/No) during the 12-month follow-up period. Results: A total of 89 participants (average age 86 years ± 8.05; 71.9% female) were followed for 12-months post-intervention. Participants in the intervention group (n=44) had a significantly greater hazard ratio of falls (2.01; 95% CI = 1.11 to 3.63) than the control group (n=45) when accounting for the history of falls, frailty status, cognition level, and sex. Conclusion: Participants who received a standing intervention over 22 weeks were twice as likely to fall 12 months after the intervention compared with the control group. However, the prevalence of falls did not surpass what would be typically observed in LTC facilities. It is imperative that future studies describe in detail the context in which falls happen and collect more characteristics of participants in the follow-up period to truly understand the association between standing more and the risk of falls.
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.