Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41291483›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2025

Vision screening in older adults who attend hospital following a fall: a scoping review.

Aishah Baig, Kate Radford, Alison Cowley, Jignasa Mehta, Adam Gordon, Janice Christian, Laila Ibrahim, Marziye Akkurt, Marriha Ali, Emma Self

Abstract readScoping Review
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Aishah BaigNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Queens Medical Centre, Derby Road, NG7 2UH, Nottingham, United Kingdom. aishah.baig@nottingham.ac.uk.
Kate RadfordCentre for Rehabilitation and Ageing Research, School of Medical, University of Nottingham, Derby Road, NG7 2UH, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
Alison CowleyNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Queens Medical Centre, Derby Road, NG7 2UH, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
Jignasa MehtaInstitute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Brownlow Street, Liverpool, L69 3GF, United Kingdom.
Adam GordonWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, EC1M 6BQ, London, United Kingdom.
Janice ChristianHuman Factors Research Group, Innovative Technology Research Centre, University of Nottingham, NG7 2RD, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
Laila IbrahimMoorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Moorfields Eye Hospital, 162 City Road, EC1V 2PD, London, United Kingdom.
Marziye AkkurtDoncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Doncaster Royal Infirmary, Thorne Road, DN2 5LT, Doncaster, United Kingdom.
Marriha AliSheffield Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield Children's Hospital, Clarkson Street, S10 2TH, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Emma SelfCentre for Rehabilitation and Ageing Research, School of Medical, University of Nottingham, Derby Road, NG7 2UH, Nottingham, United Kingdom.

Funding

Dunhill Medical Trust ARHV23\1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe assessment of impaired vision is included in falls prevention guidance for older adults, but implementation is variable. We conducted a scoping review to better understand current practice and inform future implementation research around vision assessments for older adults attending acute hospitals following a fall. We explored the extent and types of evidence, key concepts, methods, emerging topics and identified evidence gaps.

methodsJBI methodology was followed. MEDLINE, AMED, EMBASE, PsychInfo, CINAHL and WebofScience were systematically searched for literature on the assessment of vision in older adults attending acute hospitals following a fall. Sources eligible for inclusion had a mean/median population age of 65 years or over, included patients presenting to an acute hospital setting following a fall and described vision assessments in these patients. Grey literature, conference abstracts and sources without a full text were excluded. Title, abstract and full-text screening were completed by two independent reviewers. Data extraction and charting of the data were performed by the primary author. Data analysis comprised descriptive statistics of study characteristics and content analysis of vision assessment methods used.

resultsWe included 27 studies from 13 countries, between 1806 and 2024. Studies reported various vision assessment methods. Questions frequently asked in vision assessments included: presence of visual symptoms (n = 9), date of last eye test (n = 9) and previous ocular history (n = 5). The most common visual function assessed was distance visual acuity (n = 12). Six studies used standardised screening tools, including: the Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths & Injuries (STEADI) 12-question falls risk screening tool, a modified Kombinert Alvorlig Sansesvikt (Combined Serious Sensory Impairment) (KAS-Screen), procedures of the InterRAI-AC, the St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool In Falling elderly inpatients (STRATIFY), the Physiological Profile Assessment (PPA) and the Look Out! Bedside vision check. The most common post-screening interventions were: advising an eye test with an optometrist (n = 8), advising an ophthalmology referral (n = 7) and patient education (n = 6).

conclusionsThe literature on vision screening in this population was sparse and there was heterogeneity in current practices, highlighting the need for standardised screening protocols. More research is needed to evaluate vision screening services in this population and to explore implementation barriers.

Indexed as

Accidental FallsVision DisordersVision ScreeningAgedAged, 80 and overHumansAgeingFallsVisionVision screening

Identifiers

PMID41291483
PMCPMC12648902

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.