ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2023
In-hospital fall prediction using machine learning algorithms and the Morse fall scale in patients with acute stroke: a nested case-control study.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between modified Rankin Scale scores and fall risk in post-stroke rehabilitation inpatients: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- A scoping review of machine learning models to predict risk of falls in elders, without using sensor data.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2025Review
- Constructing a fall risk prediction model for hospitalized patients using machine learning.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Advances in nursing care for post-stroke limb dysfunction rehabilitation.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Predicting Stroke Risk Using Machine Learning: A Data-Driven Approach to Early Detection and Prevention.Stroke research and treatment · 2025Article
- Image Findings as Predictors of Fall Risk in Patients with Cerebrovascular Disease.Brain sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFalls are one of the most common accidents in medical institutions, which can threaten the safety of inpatients and negatively affect their prognosis. Herein, we developed a machine learning (ML) model for fall prediction in patients with acute stroke and compared its accuracy with that of the existing fall risk prediction tool, the Morse Fall Scale (MFS).
methodsThis is a retrospective nested case-control study. The initial sample size was 8462 admitted to a single cerebrovascular specialty hospital with acute stroke. A total of 156 fall events occurred, and each fall case was randomly matched with six control cases. Six ML algorithms were used, namely, regularized logistic regression, support vector machine, naïve Bayes (NB), k-nearest neighbors, random forest, and extreme-gradient boosting (XGB).
resultsWe included 156 in the fall group and 934 in the non-fall group. The mean ages of the fall and non-fall groups were 68.3 (± 12.2) and 65.3 (± 12.9) years old, respectively. The MFS total score was significantly higher in the fall group (54.3 ± 18.3) than in the non-fall group (37.7 ± 14.7). The area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) of the MFS in predicting falls was 0.76 (0.73-0.79). XGB had the highest AUROC of 0.85 (0.78-0.92), and XGB and NB had the highest F1 score of 0.44.
conclusionsThe AUROC values of all of ML algorithms were similar to those of the MFS in predicting fall risk in patients with acute stroke, allowing for accurate and efficient fall screening.
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.