Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 788

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Falls in the Elderly: A Prospective Study of Risk Factors and Risk Profiles

Open access
Graafmans, W. C., Ooms, M. E., Hofstee, H. M. A., Bezemer, P. D., Bouter, L. M., Lips, P.·1996·American Journal of Epidemiology

Abstract

In this prospective study, the authors determined intrinsic risk factors for falls and recurrent falls and constructed a risk profile that indicated the relative contribution of each risk factor and also estimated the probabilities of falls and recurrent falls. In 1992, over a 28-week period, falls were recorded among 354 elderly subjects aged 70 years or over who were living in homes or apartments for the elderly in Amsterdam and the vicinity. During the study period, 251 falls were reported by 126 subjects (36%), and recurrent falls (> or =2 falls) were reported by 57 subjects (16%). Associations of falls and recurrent falls with potential risk factors were identified in logistic regression models. Mobility impairment regarding one or more of the tested items (i.e., impairment of balance, leg-extension strength, and gait) was associated with falls (adjusted odds ratio (OR) =2.6) and was strongly associated with recurrent falls (OR = 5.0). Dizziness upon standing was associated with falls (OR = 2.1) and recurrent falls (OR = 2.1). However, several risk factors were associated with recurrent falls only: history of stroke (OR = 3.4), poor mental state (OR = 2.4), and postural hypotension (OR = 2.0). The authors constructed a risk profile for recurrent falls that included the five risk factors mentioned above. Inclusion of all risk factors in the profile implied an 84% probability of recurrent falls over a period of 28 weeks, compared with 3% when no risk factor was present. The probability of recurrent falls ranged only from 11% to 29% when predicted by number of falls occurring in the previous year. Physical activity, use of high-risk medication, and the use of vitamin D3, which was randomly allocated to the participants, were not strongly related to either falls or recurrent falls. In conclusion, a large range of probabilities of falls, especially of recurrent falls, was estimated by the risk profiles, in which mobility impairment was the major risk factor. Recurrent fallers may therefore be especially amenable to prevention based on mobility improvement.

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/oxfordjournals.aje.a008690

Cites

2 of 2 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

Cited by

See all 788

Metadata

Authors
Graafmans, W. C., Ooms, M. E., Hofstee, H. M. A., Bezemer, P. D., Bouter, L. M., & Lips, P.
Venue
American Journal of Epidemiology
Published
1996-06-01
Volume
143
Issue
11
Pages
1129-1136
ISSN
  • 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-6256
OpenAlex
W2159754119
Cited by
788
References
2
FWCI
42.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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.