Cited by 54Balance, Gait, and Falls PreventionNutrition and Health in AgingNutritional Studies and Diet

Vegetable and fruit intake and injurious falls risk in older women: A prospective cohort study

Open access
Sim, Marc, Blekkenhorst, Lauren C., Lewis, Joshua R., Bondonno, Catherine P., Devine, Amanda, Zhu, Kun, Woodman, Richard J., Prince, Richard L. +1 more·2018·British Journal of Nutrition

Abstract

The role of vegetable and fruit intake in reducing falls risk in elderly populations is uncertain. This study examined the associations of vegetable and fruit intake with falls-related hospitalisations in a prospective cohort study of elderly women (n 1429, ≥70 years), including effects on muscular function, which represented a potential causal pathway. Muscular function, measured using grip strength and timed-up-and-go (TUG), and vegetable and fruit intake, quantified using a validated FFQ, were assessed at baseline (1998). Incident falls-related hospitalisation over 14·5-year follow-up was captured by the Hospital Morbidity Data Collection, linked via the Western Australian Data Linkage System. Falls-related hospitalisation occurred in 568 (39·7 %) of women. In multivariable-adjusted models, falls-related hospitalisations were lower in participants consuming more vegetables (hazard ratio (HR) per 75 g serve: 0·90 (95 % CI 0·82, 0·99)), but not fruit intake (per 150 g serve: 1·03 (95 % CI 0·93, 1·14)). Only total cruciferous vegetable intake was inversely associated with falls-related hospitalisation (HR: per 20 g serve: 0·90 (95 % CI 0·83, 0·97)). Higher total vegetable intake was associated with lower odds for poor grip strength (OR: 0·87 (95 % CI 0·77, 0·97)) and slow TUG (OR: 0·88 (95 % CI 0·78, 0·99)). Including grip strength and TUG in the multivariable-adjusted model attenuated the association between total vegetable intake and falls-related hospitalisations. In conclusion, elderly women with higher total and cruciferous vegetable intake had lower injurious falls risk, which may be explained in a large part by better physical function. Falls reduction may be considered an additional benefit of higher vegetable intake in older women.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0007114518002155

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Higher habitual nitrate intake is associated with greater handgrip strength, better functional performance, and a reduced risk of mobility impairment and falls in older populations.

    “higher habitual nitrate intake is associated with greater handgrip strength, better functional performance, and a reduced risk of mobility impairment and falls in older populations [189,199].”

    From Dietary Nitrate-Rich Vegetables as Natural Modulators of Health: Mechanisms and Benefits in Ageing Populations (2026) · cites this paper as [199]

    The Vegetable intake, muscle strength and physical function section (page not available) associates higher vegetable intake with lower odds of weak grip strength and slow timed-up-and-go performance. The Vegetable consumption section (page not available) also reports fewer falls-related hospitalisations among older women with higher vegetable intake. The paper does not establish these associations for nitrate intake specifically, and its findings in older women do not establish them across older populations generally. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sim, M., Blekkenhorst, L. C., Lewis, J. R., Bondonno, C. P., Devine, A., Zhu, K., Woodman, R. J., Prince, R. L., & Hodgson, J. M.
Affiliations
  • Edith Cowan University (AU)
  • The University of Western Australia (AU)
  • Flinders University (AU)
Corresponding author
Sim, Marc
Venue
British Journal of Nutrition
Published
2018-08-29
Volume
120
Issue
8
Pages
925-934
ISSN
  • 0007-1145 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-2662
OpenAlex
W2888984351
Cited by
54
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3
FWCI
7.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal Of Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (submittedVersion)
  • Australasian Journal of Paramedicine (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Royal Perth Hospital Medical Research Foundation
  • Healthway (572604, 254627, 303169)
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (572604, 303169, 1107474, 254627)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
Keywords
vegetable consumption, fruit consumption, cruciferous vegetables, injurious falls, older women, grip strength, Timed Up and Go test, muscle function, physical function
MeSH terms
Accidental Falls, Aged, Diet, Diet Surveys, Female, Fruit, Humans, Risk Factors, Vegetables, Cohort Studies, Muscle Strength

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review