ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Data-Driven Phenotyping from Foot-Mounted IMU Waveforms: Elucidating Phenotype-Specific Fall Mechanisms.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Interpretable and explainable artificial intelligence for wearable sensor-based fall risk assessment in older adults: a systematic review with considerations for prosthetics and orthotics.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A one-size-fits-all approach to fall risk assessment in older adults has critical limitations. This study aimed to overcome this by identifying distinct gait phenotypes and their specific fall mechanisms using foot-mounted IMU waveform data from 146 older adults (mean age 82.6 ± 6.2 years). A data-driven clustering algorithm identified four phenotypes (Robust, High-cadence, Intermediate, and Cautious), each with different fall prevalence rates (27-68%). Interpretable machine learning (SHAP) revealed that fall trajectories were phenotype-dependent. While physiological declines such as gait speed were the primary cause of falls in the Cautious group, fear of falling (FES-I) was the primary cause in the physically healthy Robust group, suggesting a psychological pathway. Consequently, the optimal Timed Up and Go (TUG) test screening cutoff varied across phenotypes, ranging from 11.95 s to 14.00 s, demonstrating the limitations of a one-size-fits-all approach. These findings demonstrate that fall mechanisms are phenotype-dependent, underscoring the necessity of a personalized assessment strategy to improve fall prevention.
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.