ArticleCanadian geriatrics journal : CGJ2026
Fall Risk Identification with Innovative Technologies for Aging in Place: A Clinical Needs Assessment Study.
Article in Canadian geriatrics journal : CGJ, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Falls are a leading cause of injury and loss of independence among older adults. While gait-monitoring technologies offer promise for early fall risk detection, adoption is hindered by usability, cost, and integration challenges. Few studies incorporate perspectives from both patients and providers to inform user-centred design. Objective: To identify barriers, facilitators, and design considerations for implementing gait-monitoring and fall-assessment technologies among older adults, caregivers, and healthcare providers. Methods: A qualitative needs assessment was conducted with older adults (≥65 years), caregivers, and healthcare providers in British Columbia, Canada. Participants were recruited via REACH BC, community organizations, and professional networks. Data collection included demographic surveys, standardized questionnaires (EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L), Patient Activation Measure (PAM-13), Fall Efficacy Scale), and semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis was performed using NVivo 12. Results: Twenty-nine older adults/caregivers participated. Most reported slight-to-moderate functional limitations and high engagement in self-care. Four key themes emerged: (i) navigating health and fall prevention-proactive self-management but access barriers; (ii) embracing and questioning health technologies-interest tempered by complexity and perceived relevance; (iii) openness to gait monitoring and boundaries of trust-conditional acceptance, privacy concerns; (iv) designing for real lives-preferences for comfortable, discreet, affordable devices and integration into clinical workflows. Providers valued continuous data but cited cost, patient tech-readiness, and actionable output as critical. Conclusion: Stakeholders expressed interest in gait-monitoring technologies that are affordable, discreet, easy to use, and respectful of autonomy. Aligning device design with both personal comfort and clinical utility, and addressing privacy and integration challenges, may improve adoption and support safe aging in place.
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.