Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 530

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

The Effectiveness of a Community‐Based Program for Reducing the Incidence of Falls in the Elderly: A Randomized Trial

Clemson, Lindy, Cumming, Robert G., Kendig, Hal, Swann, Megan, Heard, Robert, Taylor, Kirsty·2004·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract

Objectives: To test whether Stepping On, a multifaceted community‐based program using a small‐group learning environment, is effective in reducing falls in at‐risk people living at home. Design: A randomized trial with subjects followed for 14 months. Setting: The interventions were conducted in community venues, with a follow‐up home visit. Participants: Three hundred ten community residents aged 70 and older who had had a fall in the previous 12 months or were concerned about falling. Intervention: The Stepping On program aims to improve fall self‐efficacy, encourage behavioral change, and reduce falls. Key aspects of the program are improving lower‐limb balance and strength, improving home and community environmental and behavioral safety, encouraging regular visual screening, making adaptations to low vision, and encouraging medication review. Two‐hour sessions were conducted weekly for 7 weeks, with a follow‐up occupational therapy home visit. Measurements: The primary outcome measure was falls, ascertained using a monthly calendar mailed by each participant. Results: The intervention group experienced a 31% reduction in falls (relative risk (RR)=0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.50–0.96; P =.025). This was a clinically meaningful result demonstrating that the Stepping On program was effective for community‐residing elderly people. Secondary analysis of subgroups showed that it was particularly effective for men (n=80; RR=0.32, 95% CI=0.17–0.59). Conclusion: The results of this study renew attention to the idea that cognitive‐behavioral learning in a small‐group environment can reduce falls. Stepping On offers a successful fall‐prevention option.

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.1532-5415.2004.52411.x

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 530

Metadata

Authors
Clemson, L., Cumming, R. G., Kendig, H., Swann, M., Heard, R., & Taylor, K.
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-08-16
Volume
52
Issue
9
Pages
1487-1494
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
OpenAlex
W1511543785
Cited by
530
References
2
FWCI
45.78
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.