Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37906588›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

A machine learning approach to identify important variables for distinguishing between fallers and non-fallers in older women.

Emily Gregg, Clive Beggs, Athanassios Bissas, Gareth Nicholson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Emily GreggCarnegie School of Sport, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0003-2969-793X
Clive BeggsCarnegie School of Sport, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Athanassios BissasSchool of Sport and Exercise, University of Gloucestershire, Gloucester, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7858-9623
Gareth NicholsonCarnegie School of Sport, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBLeeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust · GBLeeds Beckett University · GBUniversity of Gloucestershire · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Falls are a significant ongoing public health concern for older adults. At present, few studies have concurrently explored the influence of multiple measures when seeking to determine which variables are most predictive of fall risks. As such, this cross-sectional study aimed to identify those functional variables (i.e. balance, gait and clinical measures) and physical characteristics (i.e. strength and body composition) that could best distinguish between older female fallers and non-fallers, using a machine learning approach. Overall, 60 community-dwelling older women (≥65 years), retrospectively classified as fallers (n = 21) or non-fallers (n = 39), attended three data collection sessions. Data (281 variables) collected from tests in five separate domains (balance, gait, clinical measures, strength and body composition) were analysed using random forest (RF) and leave-one-variable-out partial least squares correlation analysis (LOVO PLSCA) to assess variable importance. The strongest discriminators from each domain were then aggregated into a multi-domain dataset, and RF, LOVO PLSCA, and logistic regression models were constructed to identify the important variables in distinguishing between fallers and non-fallers. These models were used to classify participants as either fallers or non-fallers, with their performance evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. The study found that it is possible to classify fallers and non-fallers with a high degree of accuracy (e.g. logistic regression: sensitivity = 90%; specificity = 87%; AUC = 0.92; leave-one-out cross-validation accuracy = 63%) using a combination of 18 variables from four domains, with the gait and strength domains being particularly informative for screening programmes aimed at assessing falls risk.

Indexed as

GaitMachine LearningAccidental FallsAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesPostural BalanceRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID37906588
PMCPMC10617741
OpenAlexW4388081128

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.