ArticleBMC public health2026
Implementation of Falls Management Exercise (FaME) falls prevention programme among community-dwelling older adults. A scoping review.
Article in BMC public health, 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.
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
backgroundA common cause of injury, disability, mortality, and health-related costs, falls affect a third of adults aged 65 years and older. Falls Management Exercise (FaME) is an evidence-based, progressive falls prevention programme, shown to significantly reduce falls and concerns about falls among community-dwelling older adults. Despite the proven benefits of FaME, there are inconsistencies in implementation fidelity and programme delivery. Variances in attendance, adherence and dose, required to ensure efficacy, can negatively impact real-world effectiveness of FaME. This scoping review aims to address the paucity of evidence synthesis on FaME implementation. Identifying key characteristics relating to intervention delivery, implementation and behaviour change strategies, participant uptake, adherence, meeting of effective dose, attrition, and fidelity.
methodsAdopting an approved methodology for conducting scoping reviews, seven electronic databases were searched using the Population, Context and Concept inclusion criteria. These relate to; older adults (≥60 years), 'community-dwelling' and FaME. From an initial 10,888 papers, 26 research papers (13 studies), were included in the full text review, of which ten papers (six studies) used technology in delivering FaME.
resultsKey themes: challenges in meeting recruitment target and uptake of FaME, particularly underserved ethnic and socioeconomic populations; significantly fewer older men participating in FaME when compared to older women; issues of poor adherence and meeting of effective dose, especially with home-based exercise components; high rates of attrition and the value of Instructor qualities in delivering FaME. Studies which included technology-assisted implementation reported increased participation by older men, with programmes performing better in terms of adherence, attrition and exercise dose.
conclusionsWith digital health technologies showing promising effects on persistent challenges to adherence, dose, and attrition, technology-assisted implementation of FaME has potential to effectively support a wider uptake of FaME among community-dwelling older adults who decline or withdraw participation. Further research is needed to increase our understanding of under-served community-dwelling older adults experiences, and perceptions about FaME and falls prevention. We need to further explore the acceptability of technology-assisted implementation of FaME, and feasibility for supporting a wider roll-out of FaME across the United Kingdom. CLINICAL
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.