ArticleBMC public health2026
Development and validation of a new instrument to assess risk of falls among infants and toddlers.
Article in BMC public health, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFall-related injuries are the leading cause of disability and mortality among infants and toddlers. Effective prevention requires reliable assessment of fall risk, however, existing tools have several limitations. This study aimed to develop and validate a new instrument to assess risk of falls in this population.
methodsThe instrument was developed using Delphi process and validated through statistical analysis. Fourteen experts participated in the consultation, and 296 respondents completed an online cross-sectional survey. External validation was performed using a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design involving 100 participants. Evaluation measurements included Cronbach’s alpha, correlation coefficients, exploratory graph analysis, and factor analysis.
resultsThe Delphi process yielded three-scale instrument, including home environment hazards (20 items), children’s activity (12 items) and parental supervision (11 items), with Cronbach’s alpha of 0.898, 0.898 and 0.907 respectively. Test–retest reliability and inter-observer reliability were 0.837 and 0.812 for home environment hazards scale. Fall-related injury hazard density (1.511 vs 1.475 per 10 m2, P = 0.878) and dynamic hazard exposure (1.035 vs 0.847 per 10 m2, P = 0.412) were higher in the fall-occurrence group compared to the non-fall group.
conclusionThe newly developed instrument demonstrated high internal consistency and acceptable validity for assessing fall risk among infants and toddlers, supporting its use in the subsequent RCT study for further validation.
trial registrationRCT study involved in our research was registered on 25 April 2021 at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( http://www.chictr.org.cn ), clinical trial number: ChiCTR2100045859.
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.