ArticleFrontiers in aging2026
PolyPIMuse significantly increases fall risk: comparison of three medication evaluation tools.
Article in Frontiers in aging, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Falls are a leading cause of injury and hospitalization in older adults, with pharmacotherapy identified as a modifiable risk factor. Tools for identifying potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), such as the EU(7)PIM, PRISCUS, and FORTA lists, differ in methodology. However, their comparative performance in predicting fall risk has not been systematically evaluated. The aim of our work was to investigate the association between PIM use and fall risk among older adults and to analyze the correlations between PIM utilization based on three PIM lists (EU(7)PIM, PRISCUS, and FORTA C/D) and fall risk. Methods: In a retrospective case -control study based on real-world data from Hungarian emergency and primary care settings, we analyzed fall-related emergency department visits (n=886) in individuals aged ≥65 years and matched them with a control group from general practices (n = 1364). Results: Use of PIMs identified by all three lists was significantly associated with increased fall risk. (Use of 1 FORTA C/D active substance: AOR: 1.434; CI95%:1.120-1.838; p = 0.004; Use of 1 EU(7)PIM active substance: AOR: 1.201; CI95%: 0.907-1.591; p = 0.200; Use of 1 PRISCUS active substance: AOR: 1.390; CI95%:1.069-1.808; p = 0.014) Of the three lists, use of drugs on the PRISCUS list was most significantly associated with increased fall risk. (Use of 2 PRISCUS active substance: AOR: 1.557; CI95%:1.148-2.114; p = 0.004; Use of 3 PRISCUS active substance: AOR: 2.045; CI95%: 1.408-2.982; p = 0.000; Use of 4 PRISCUS active substance: AOR: 1.869; CI95%: 1.149-3.065; p = 0.012; Use of 5 PRISCUS active substance: AOR: 2.638; CI95%: 1.464-4.895; p = 0.002). Discussion: We introduce the concept of "polyPIMuse" -the use of ≥5 PIM-listed drugs -which further elevated fall risk, particularly for PRISCUS and FORTA C/D lists. Despite methodological differences, all three PIM tools proved useful in predicting fall risk. Incorporating these tools into routine medication reviews may aid fall prevention strategies in geriatric care.
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.