Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 344

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Resistance and Agility Training Reduce Fall Risk in Women Aged 75 to 85 with Low Bone Mass: A 6‐Month Randomized, Controlled Trial *

Open access
Liu‐Ambrose, Teresa, Khan, Karim M., Eng, Janice J., Janssen, Patti A., Lord, Stephen R., Mckay, Heather A.·2004·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of group resistance and agility‐training programs in reducing fall risk in community‐dwelling older women with low bone mass. Design: A randomized, controlled, single‐blind 25‐week prospective study with assessments at baseline, midpoint, and trial completion. Setting: Community center. Participants: Community‐dwelling women aged 75 to 85 with low bone mass. Intervention: Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: resistance training (n=32), agility training (n=34), and stretching (sham) exercises (n=32). The exercise classes for each study arm were held twice weekly. Measurements: The primary outcome measure was fall risk (derived from weighted scores from tests of postural sway, reaction time, strength, proprioception, and vision), as measured using a Physiological Profile Assessment (PPA). Secondary outcome measures were ankle dorsiflexion strength, foot reaction time, and Community Balance and Mobility Scale score. Results: Attendance at the exercise sessions for all three groups was excellent: resistance training (85.4%), agility training (87.3%), and stretching program (78.8%). At the end of the trial, PPA fall‐risk scores were reduced by 57.3% and 47.5% in the resistance and agility‐training groups, respectively, but by only 20.2% in the stretching group. In the resistance and agility groups, the reduction in fall risk was mediated primarily by improved postural stability, where sway was reduced by 30.6% and 29.2%, respectively. There were no significant differences between the groups for the secondary outcomes measures. Within the resistance‐training group, reductions in sway were significantly associated with improved strength, as assessed using increased squat load used in the exercise sessions. Conclusion: These findings support the implementation of community‐based resistance and agility‐training programs to reduce fall risk in older women with low bone mass. Such programs may have particular public health benefits because it has been shown that this group is at increased risk of falling and sustaining fall‐related fractures.

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 · 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2004.52200.x

Cites

5 of 5 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 5 references

Cited by

See all 344

Metadata

Authors
Liu‐Ambrose, T., Khan, K. M., Eng, J. J., Janssen, P. A., Lord, S. R., & Mckay, H. A.
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-04-14
Volume
52
Issue
5
Pages
657-665
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
OpenAlex
W1497829453
Cited by
344
References
5
FWCI
59.42
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

How to cite

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

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Resistance and Agility Training Reduce Fall Risk in Women Aged 75 to 85 with Low Bone Mass: A 6‐Month Randomized, Controlled Trial *. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2004.52200.x
The paper
Liu‐Ambrose, T., Khan, K. M., Eng, J. J., Janssen, P. A., Lord, S. R., & Mckay, H. A. (2004). Resistance and Agility Training Reduce Fall Risk in Women Aged 75 to 85 with Low Bone Mass: A 6‐Month Randomized, Controlled Trial *. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2004.52200.x

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.