Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41023642›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2025

Falls risk perception among older adults and carers: a cross-sectional study.

Mahbub Hasan, Bernard Walsh, Christopher Oldmeadow, Andrea Coda

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Mahbub HasanRoyal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, Australia. docmahbubhasan@yahoo.com.
Bernard WalshJohn Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, Australia.
Christopher OldmeadowHunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI), Newcastle, NSW, 2305, Australia.
Andrea CodaSchool of Health Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe main objective of the study was to explore and compare patient and carer perception of risk of falls using a concept perception of falls risk scale. We also investigated the relationship between poor perception of falls risk and potential determinants of poor perception of falls risk.

methodsA cross-sectional quantitative study was developed to capture perception of risk of falls. Informed written consents were obtained. Face to face and telephone interviews were conducted with questionnaires to explore perception of patients and carers about falls risk.

resultsParticipants underwent a structured interview answering survey questions related to perceptions and experiences of falls. Data was collected for 76 patients and 36 carers. 81% of the analysis population exhibited poor perception of falls risk in our concept perception of falls risk scale; this was evident among 88% of patients compared to 67% of carers. Both age and psychotropic medication were found to be potential determinants of differences in poor perception of falls risk.

conclusionPerception of risk of fall is low among older adults and their carers. This study findings suggest participants in various settings and their carers need education about their falls risk to improve their falls risk awareness.

Indexed as

Accidental FallsCaregiversPerceptionAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesCarersFallOlder adultsPerceptionRisk

Identifiers

PMID41023642
PMCPMC12481807

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.