SynthesisJournal of advanced nursing2026
Standards for Hospital Falls Prevention and Management: An International Comparative Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of advanced nursing, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHospital falls and associated injuries are a global issue associated with harm and significant costs to individuals and society, especially for older adults. Hospital standards specify the minimum level of care required to optimise patient safety, quality and outcomes. Standards are often used during hospital accreditation. This investigation analysed the content and quality of hospital falls standards across the globe.
methodsHospital standards were located by searching online databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Google Scholar, MEDLINE), ChatGPT, the grey literature via internet search engines, and websites of accreditation agencies, government agencies, and other relevant organisations. We searched for standards from the 60 largest countries by population plus the 60 countries with the highest gross domestic product (n = 82 after accounting for duplicates). For inclusion, hospital standards had to mention 'fall/s'. Data were analysed using a deductive framework synthesis and content analysis to identify emergent themes.
resultsForty-one standards used by at least 72 countries were identified from our search. Sixteen were excluded from detailed analysis because they did not mention falls and 3 could not be retrieved. A total of 22 standards were included in the final detailed analysis. Included standards showed wide variations in content and quality. Seven were assessed as high quality, 12 medium quality, and 3 were deemed to be of low quality. Some lacked details on hospital falls screening, assessment, prevention, and management. Consumer engagement in development, implementation, or evaluation was not mentioned in all standards. Procedures for falls data collection and reporting were seldom documented. Hospital standards infrequently referred readers to contemporary research or clinical practice guidelines.
conclusionThere are variations in the quality and content of standards on hospital falls. International collaboration is recommended to increase the consistency and validity of hospital falls standards across nations, in order to optimise healthcare outcomes. IMPACT: The findings of this global analysis of hospital falls standards have the potential to impact falls rates and fall-related injuries in hospital patients by providing data to inform the content, evidence base and use of hospital standards to optimise the safety and quality of care delivery. The findings inform the review, design and implementation of hospital accreditation procedures to improve patient outcomes, patient experiences, and service quality.
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.