The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Visual Risk Factors for Falls in Older People
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the tests most predictive of falls in community‐dwelling older people from a range of visual screening tests (high and low contrast visual acuity, edge contrast sensitivity, depth perception, and visual field size). To determine whether one or more of these visual measures, in association with measures of sensation, strength, reaction time, and balance, can accurately predict falls in this group. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of 12 months duration. SETTING: Falls and Balance Laboratory, Prince of Wales Medical Research Institute. PARTICIPANTS: 156 community‐dwelling men and women age 63 to 90 (mean age 76.5, standard deviation = 5.1). MEASUREMENTS: Screening tests of vision, sensation, strength, reaction time and balance, falls. RESULTS: Of the 148 subjects available at follow‐up, 64 (43.2%) reported falling, with 32 (21.7%) reporting multiple falls. Multiple fallers had decreased vision, as indicated by all visual tests, with impaired depth perception, contrast sensitivity, and low‐contrast visual acuity being the strongest risk factors. Subjects with good vision in both eyes had the lowest rate of falls, whereas those with good vision in one eye and only moderate or poor vision in the other eye had elevated falling rates—equivalent to those with moderate or poor vision in both eyes. Discriminant analysis revealed that impaired depth perception, slow reaction time, and increased body sway on a compliant surface were significantly and independently associated with falls. These variables correctly classified 76% of the cases, with similar sensitivity and specificity. CONCLUSION: The study findings indicate that impaired vision is an important and independent risk factor for falls. Adequate depth perception and distant‐edge‐contrast sensitivity, in particular, appear to be important for maintaining balance and detecting and avoiding hazards in the environment.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Risk Factors for Hip Fracture in White Women
Cummings, S. R., Nevitt, M. C., Browner, W. S., Stone, K., Fox, K. M., Ensrud, K. E., Cauley, J., Black, D., & Vogt, T. M. (1995) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199503233321202 · Cited by 3,595
Cited by
Visual loss and falls: a review
Dhital, A., Pey, T., & Stanford, M. R. (2010) · Eye · doi:10.1038/eye.2010.60 · Cited by 193
Mobility and low contrast trip hazard avoidance using augmented depth
McCarthy, C., Walker, J. G., Lieby, P., Scott, A., & Barnes, N. (2015) · Journal of Neural Engineering · doi:10.1088/1741-2560/12/1/016003 · Cited by 49
“Why would I want to go out?”: age-related vision loss and social participation
Laliberte Rudman, D., Gold, D., McGrath, C., Zuvela, B., Spafford, M. M., & Renwick, R. (2016) · Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement · doi:10.1017/s0714980816000490 · Cited by 40
Ottosson, J., Lavesson, L., Pinzke, S., & Grahn, P. (2015) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph120707274 · Cited by 21
Dev, M. K., Black, A. A., Cuda, D., & Wood, J. M. (2022) · Translational Vision Science & Technology · doi:10.1167/tvst.11.3.21 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Lord, S. R., & Dayhew, J.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-05
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 508-515
- ISSN
- 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-5415
- OpenAlex
- W2088648173
- Cited by
- 688
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 52.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.