ReviewJournal of frailty, sarcopenia and falls2026
Toward An Improved Reporting of Fall Circumstances Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Reporting Guide for the 6 W's of Falls.
Review in Journal of frailty, sarcopenia and falls, 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
Abstract
While much attention has been given to fall risk factors and outcomes among community-dwelling older adults, the specific circumstances of falls have been comparatively underexplored. This systematic review aimed to characterize data collection and reporting practices of fall circumstances. A systematic search of Medline, Embase, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library from database inception-2026 identified studies reporting on the prevalence of specific fall circumstances. From 9,872 articles screened, 75 studies met the inclusion criteria and underwent data extraction. Circumstances were not consistently reported across studies; among the 11 domains that were evaluated, reporting of each circumstance ranged from 7 to 95% of studies. Concerns for study quality emerged due to failure to clearly define falls, use of long time periods between experiencing and reporting details of a fall, and only reporting circumstances of falls for a subset of falls that were collected without justification. To address issues with heterogeneity in reporting of fall circumstances, we propose a standardized interview and reporting guide based on these findings using the 6 W's framework: Who?, Where?, What?, When?, Why?, and HoW?. Use of this guide can lead researchers to greater consistency in reporting fall circumstances, ultimately enhancing the quality of future research and better informing fall prevention strategies.
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.