ArticleProsthetics and orthotics international2026
Distinguishing retrospective fallers from nonfallers in people who use a unilateral lower-limb prosthesis.
Article in Prosthetics and orthotics international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOver 52% of people who use a lower-limb prosthesis fall once every year, but fall risk is still not effectively screened. Few studies have identified clinical outcome measures that could help screen fall risk. Gait asymmetries between the intact and prosthetic limbs could also potentially help identify fall risk, based on findings in people with stroke. However, no studies have examined the relationship between gait asymmetries and falls in people who use a lower-limb prosthesis. Therefore, we sought to determine if any gait asymmetry parameters could significantly distinguish 12-month retrospective fallers from nonfallers.
methodsPeople were recruited from private practice and the Amputee Coalition National Conference. Participants completed a 12-month retrospective fall history and 7 clinical outcome measures, as well as level-ground walking at self-selected pace with wearable sensors that collected kinematic (sagittal plane: hip, knee, and ankle range of motion) and kinetic (peak braking and propulsion ground reaction force) data.
resultsTwenty-two individuals who use a unilateral prosthesis participated (age 57.6 ± 14.2 years; 15 transtibial, 7 transfemoral). No gait asymmetry parameters significantly distinguished 12-month retrospective fallers from nonfallers. However, the Four Square Step Test did significantly distinguish fallers from nonfallers ( P = 0.040, Hedge g = -0.739, area under the curve = 0.725, CI = 50-95%, cutoff time = 13.14 s), irrespective of level of prosthesis use. No parameters significantly distinguished fallers from nonfallers by level of prosthesis use (transtibial, transfemoral).
conclusionsThe Four Square Step Test cutoff time may be useful to distinguish fallers from nonfallers in unilateral lower-limb prosthesis users.
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.