ArticleScientific reports2026
Comparative analysis of wearable-derived gait features with intrinsic risk indicators for fall risk prediction in older adults.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Discovery and validation of a multi-protein panel for predicting non-fatal major adverse cardiovascular events in diabetic kidney disease.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
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
Traditional fall risk assessment in older adults relies on intrinsic indicators derived from demographic information, clinical assessments, and mobility tests. These measures encompass variables of mixed types, including continuous, categorical, and ordinal, and are predominantly skill-oriented assessments. Wearable sensors can provide objective gait descriptors, yet how to best integrate wearable data with intrinsic indicators for fall-risk prediction remains insufficiently studied. This study systematically compares intrinsic risk indicators with wearable-derived gait parameters for predicting fall risk in older adults. We analysed 163 participants (86 fallers, 77 non-fallers; mean age 82.6 ± 6.2 years) and evaluated thirteen feature-set combinations, namely intrinsic-only, wearable-only, and hybrid, using four classifiers [logistic regression (LR), support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), and artificial neural network (ANN)] under systematic cross-validation. Genetic algorithms were employed for feature selection. Mobility tests were the strongest intrinsic indicators (AUC 0.87 to 0.90, 95% CI [0.81; 0.94]). Wearable-derived gait features alone yielded moderate discrimination (LR AUC 0.83, 95% CI [0.76; 0.88]). Combining wearable features with intrinsic indicators consistently improved performance (AUC 0.87 to 0.93 across combinations). The optimal combined signature achieved an LR AUC of 0.94 (95% CI [0.91; 0.97]; F1 = 0.871). These findings indicate that wearable-derived gait features complement, rather than replace, intrinsic risk indicators, and that their combination provides the most effective fall risk assessment.
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.