Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 497

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Executive Control Deficits as a Prodrome to Falls in Healthy Older Adults: A Prospective Study Linking Thinking, Walking, and Falling

Open access
Herman, Talia, Mirelman, Anat, Giladi, Nir, Schweiger, Avraham, Hausdorff, Jeffrey M.·2010·The Journals of Gerontology: Series A

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Executive function (EF) deficits may increase fall risk, even among older adults with no overt cognitive impairment. Indeed, the effects of dual tasking (DT) on gait, a challenge to executive control, are more exaggerated in persons with a history of falls. Prospective evidence is, however, lacking. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated whether EF predicts falls over a 2-year period among 262 community-living, healthy, and well-functioning older adults, focusing on the 201 who reported no falls during the previous year. At baseline, participants completed a computerized cognitive battery that generated an index of EF and other cognitive domains. Gait was assessed using performance-based tests and by quantifying walking during single- and dual-task conditions. RESULTS: The 262 participants (mean age: 76.3 ± 4.3 years, 60.3% women) had intact cognitive function on testing, a low comorbidity index, and good mobility. The EF index predicted future falls. Among those who reported no previous falls, participants in the worst EF quartile were three times more likely to fall during the 2 years of follow-up, and they were more likely to transition from nonfaller to faller sooner. DT gait variability also predicted future falls and multiple falls, whereas other measures of cognitive function, gait, and mobility did not. CONCLUSIONS: Among healthy older adults, individuals with poorer EF are more prone to falls. Higher-level cognitive functions such as those regulated by the frontal lobes are apparently needed for safe everyday navigation that demands multitasking. Optimal screening, early detection, and treatment of falls should, apparently, also target this cognitive domain.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/gerona/glq077

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 497

Metadata

Authors
Herman, T., Mirelman, A., Giladi, N., Schweiger, A., & Hausdorff, J. M.
Venue
The Journals of Gerontology: Series A
Published
2010-05-19
Volume
65A
Issue
10
Pages
1086-1092
ISSN
  • 1079-5006 (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-535X
OpenAlex
W2166748744
Cited by
497
References
4
FWCI
83.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Executive Control Deficits as a Prodrome to Falls in Healthy Older Adults: A Prospective Study Linking Thinking, Walking, and Falling. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/gerona/glq077
The paper
Herman, T., Mirelman, A., Giladi, N., Schweiger, A., & Hausdorff, J. M. (2010). Executive Control Deficits as a Prodrome to Falls in Healthy Older Adults: A Prospective Study Linking Thinking, Walking, and Falling. The Journals of Gerontology: Series A. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glq077

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.