ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparing interpretable machine learning models for fall risk in middle-aged and older adults with and without pain.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Explainable AI reveals temporal risk pathways in fall prediction: Extracting clinical insights from multi-horizon machine learning models.GeroScience · 2026Article
- Development of an interpretable machine learning model for predicting intestinal necrosis in older patients with incarcerated hernia: A retrospective cohort study.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pain is common in middle-aged and older adults, has also been identified as a fall risk factor, whereas the mechanism of falls in pain is unclear. This study included 13,074 middle-aged and older adults from the China health and retirement longitudinal study (wave 2011-2015) to separately develop four-year fall risk prediction models for older adults with and without pain, using five machine learning algorithms with 145 input variables as candidate features. Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) was used for the prediction model explanations. Adjusted logistic regression (LR) models showed that pain (OR 1.40 [1.29, 1.53]) was associated with a higher fall risk. Among pain characteristics, lower limb pain had the highest risk (OR 1.71 [1.22, 2.18]), followed by severe pain (OR 1.53 [1.36, 1.73]) and multisite pain (OR 1.43 [1.28, 1.55]). Among the fall prediction models for pain and non-pain, the LR model performed best with AUC-ROC values of 0.732 and 0.692, respectively. Common important features included fall history and height. Unique features for the pain model were functional limitation, SPPB, WBC, chronic disease score, life satisfaction, platelets, cooking fuel, and pain quantity, while marital status, age, depressive symptoms, cognitive function, hearing, rainy days, tidiness, and sleep duration were exclusive to the non-pain model. Pain characteristics are associated with falls among middle-aged and older adults. Prediction model can help identify people at high risk of falls with pain. Important features of falls differ between pain and non-pain populations, and prevention strategies should target specific populations for fall risk prediction.
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.