ReviewJournal of frailty, sarcopenia and falls2023
Fall risk question-based tools for fall screening in community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review of the literature.
Review in Journal of frailty, sarcopenia and falls, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electrical bioimpedance spectral markers distinguish balance ability in older adults without provoking fall risk.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Evaluation of physical exercises to assess weaknesses in physical abilities related to fall risk among adults in different ages.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Incident Falls Across Concordant and Discordant Profiles of Concerns About Falling and Functional Mobility in Older Adults: A Prospective Cohort Study.Clinical interventions in aging · 2026Article
- Older persons' experiences with wearable sensor-based fall risk screening in free-living conditions - a qualitative study.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fall screening tools aim to accurately identify the high fall risk individuals. To increase ease of administration and cost-effectiveness many studies focus on question-based tools. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify question-based tools for fall risk assessment in community-dwelling older adults over the age of 60 and the risk factors that are covered by these tools. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. A literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Data quality assessment was performed with the Ottawa-Newcastle scale. The results identified 20 studies that used 22 question-based tools to assess fall risk. The number of questions per tool varied from 1 to 41 questions. Data quality varied greatly, with values 3-9 for cohort and 2-7 for cross-sectional studies. The most commonly reported fall risk factors were fall history, feeling of unsteadiness, fear of falling, muscle strength, gait limitation and incontinence. Healthcare providers should use the above tools with caution regarding the limitations of each tool. Further studies should be designed to address individuals with high fall risk, such as individuals with cognitive impairment, as they are under-represented or excluded from most of the existing studies.
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.