Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42273617›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2026

Mobility surveillance as a public health blind spot in long-term care.

Neha Sabharwal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Neha SabharwalVintage Faire Nursing and Rehab, Modesto, CA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Public health surveillance in long-term care has appropriately prioritized acute adverse events that are discrete, reportable, and survey-sensitive, including falls, infections, pressure injuries, and hospital transfers (1, 2). These indicators capture immediate harm and regulatory risk, yet they only partially reflect resident trajectories. Functional mobility decline is common in institutional settings and is consistently associated with reduced community discharge, higher rehospitalization risk, and longer-term dependency (3-7). Although long-term care systems routinely collect functional data through standardized instruments such as the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 and the Continuity Assessment Record and Evaluation (CARE) Item Set (8-10), these data are rarely aggregated and interpreted as population-level surveillance signals. The problem is not assessment. It is the absence of surveillance-oriented use of existing function data. This perspective argues that mobility decline should be treated as an underrecognized public health signal in long-term care. It proposes a conservative path forward focused on feasibility, risk adjustment, ethics, and non-punitive use, so mobility trajectories can complement, not replace, current surveillance frameworks.

Indexed as

Long-Term CareMobility LimitationPublic HealthPublic Health SurveillanceHumansNursing Home Residentsfunctional outcomeslong-term caremobility declinenursing homespublic health surveillanceskilled nursing facilities

Identifiers

PMID42273617
PMCPMC13246364

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.