ArticleBMC geriatrics2026
Development of fall prediction models in community-dwelling older adults: comparison of biological and multidomain models for falls and injurious falls.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFalls are a leading cause of morbidity and loss of independence in older adults. Existing fall prediction models vary widely in design and performance, and the added value of incorporating nonbiological factors remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the predictive performance of the biological, sociodemographic, behavioral, and environmental domains proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) for discriminating fall risk in community-dwelling older adults.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis using baseline data from the prospective INITIATE cohort of community-dwelling adults aged ≥ 65 years. LASSO regression with 10-fold cross-validation was used to select biological predictors for any fall and injurious fall outcomes, followed by multivariable logistic regression. Sequential models reflecting sociodemographic, behavioral, and environmental domains were constructed to assess incremental discriminative performance. Model performance was assessed using the area under the ROC curve (AUC), with DeLong’s test used for comparisons. Bootstrap validation (1,000 iterations) was used to assess internal validity.
resultsA total of 433 participants were included (median age 76 years; 64% female). For any falls (n = 194, 44.8%), the reduced biological model (mobility limitation, balance, visual acuity, fear of falling) achieved an AUC of 0.64 (95% CI 0.58–0.69). For injurious falls (n = 40, 28.4%), the reduced biological model (Timed Up and Go [TUG] time, grip strength, executive function, global cognition, and pain interference) achieved an AUC of 0.73 (95% CI 0.64–0.82). Adding sociodemographic, behavioral, and environmental variables produced minimal, nonsignificant improvements for both outcomes (any falls: AUC 0.65, p = 0.46; injurious falls: AUC 0.78, p = 0.30).
conclusionsParsimonious models based primarily on biological measures can provide clinically meaningful discrimination while remaining feasible for community and outpatient use. The distinct risk profiles for any falls and injurious falls highlight the need for outcome-specific screening approaches. Prospective evaluation and external validation are needed prior to clinical implementation.
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.