The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Predicting the Probability for Falls in Community-Dwelling Older Adults Using the Timed Up & Go Test
Abstract
Background and Purpose. This study examined the sensitivity and specificity of the Timed Up & Go Test (TUG) under single-task versus dual-task conditions for identifying elderly individuals who are prone to falling. Subjects. Fifteen older adults with no history of falls (mean age=78 years, SD=6, range=65–85) and 15 older adults with a history of 2 or more falls in the previous 6 months (mean age=86.2 years, SD=6, range=76–95) participated. Methods. Time taken to complete the TUG under 3 conditions (TUG, TUG with a subtraction task [TUGcognitive], and TUG while carrying a full cup of water [TUGmanual]) was measured. A multivariate analysis of variance and discriminant function and logistic regression analyses were performed. Results. The TUG was found to be a sensitive (sensitivity=87%) and specific (specificity=87%) measure for identifying elderly individuals who are prone to falls. For both groups of older adults, simultaneous performance of an additional task increased the time taken to complete the TUG, with the greatest effect in the older adults with a history of falls. The TUG scores with or without an additional task (cognitive or manual) were equivalent with respect to identifying fallers and nonfallers. Conclusions and Discussion. The results suggest that the TUG is a sensitive and specific measure for identifying community-dwelling adults who are at risk for falls. The ability to predict falls is not enhanced by adding a secondary task when performing the TUG.
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
Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability.
Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420 · Cited by 24,532
The Timed “Up & Go”: A Test of Basic Functional Mobility for Frail Elderly Persons
Podsiadlo, D., & Richardson, S. (1991) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.1991.tb01616.x · Cited by 14,418
Cited by
Attention and the control of posture and gait: a review of an emerging area of research
Woollacott, M., & Shumway-Cook, A. (2002) · Gait & Posture · doi:10.1016/s0966-6362(01)00156-4 · Cited by 2,690
Self-citationSteffen, T. M., Hacker, T. A., & Mollinger, L. (2002) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.1093/ptj/82.2.128 · Cited by 2,070
World guidelines for falls prevention and management for older adults: a global initiative
Montero-Odasso, M., van der Velde, N., Martin, F. C., Petrovic, M., Tan, M. P., Ryg, J., Aguilar-Navarro, S., Alexander, N. B., Becker, C., Blain, H., et al. (2022) · Age and Ageing · doi:10.1093/ageing/afac205 · Cited by 1,756
Using psychometric techniques to improve the Balance Evaluation Systems Test: the mini-BESTest
Franchignoni, F., Horak, F., Godi, M., Nardone, A., & Giordano, A. (2010) · Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine · doi:10.2340/16501977-0537 · Cited by 1,081
The Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) to Differentiate Balance Deficits
Horak, F. B., Wrisley, D. M., & Frank, J. (2009) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.2522/ptj.20080071 · Cited by 1,062
Metadata
- Authors
- Shumway-Cook, A., Brauer, S., & Woollacott, M.
- Venue
- Physical Therapy
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2000-09-01
- Volume
- 80
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 896-903
- ISSN
- 0031-9023 (ISSN-L)
- 1538-6724
- OpenAlex
- W2116516133
- Cited by
- 3,356
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 72.48
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Predicting the Probability for Falls in Community-Dwelling Older Adults Using the Timed Up & Go Test. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/ptj/80.9.896
- The paper
- Shumway-Cook, A., Brauer, S., & Woollacott, M. (2000). Predicting the Probability for Falls in Community-Dwelling Older Adults Using the Timed Up & Go Test. Physical Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/80.9.896
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.