Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 94

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Person—environment fit predicts falls in older adults better than the consideration of environmental hazards only

Iwarsson, Susanne, Horstmann, Vibeke, Carlsson, Gunilla, Oswald, Frank, Wahl, Hans-Werner·2009·Clinical Rehabilitation

Abstract

Objective: To test the hypotheses that the empirical consideration of objective person—environment fit in the home environment is a stronger predictor of indoor falls among older adults than the assessment of environmental barriers only, and that perceived aspects of home play a role as predictors for falls. Design: Survey study with data collection at home visits, followed up by self-reports about falls at home visits one year later. Setting: Urban districts in Sweden, Germany, Latvia. Participants: Eight hundred and thirty-four single-living, older adults (75—89 years), in ordinary housing. Measurements: An assessment of objective person—environment fit in the home environment (housing enabler), a self-rating of the perceived home environment (usability in my home) and retrospective self-reports on indoor falls. Results: The participants reporting falls tended to be frailer than the non-fallers. The number of environmental barriers in the home was similar for the fallers and non-fallers; the magnitude of person—environment fit problems was higher among the fallers. The person—environment fit problem variable was a stronger fall predictor (odds ratio (OR) = 1.025; P=0.037) than number of environmental barriers (n.s.), even after controlling for confounders. Fallers also experienced lower usability of their home. Conclusion: The results suggest that much of the inconclusiveness of the data in the relationship between environmental hazards and falls in the previous falls literature could be due to the neglect of person—environment fit assessment. The effectiveness of environmental interventions based on the notion of person—environment fit compared with traditional home hazard checklists remains to be tested.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0269215508101740

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

1 retracted

Show all 33 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Clemson L., 2009, J Aging Health
  2. Gillespie L., 2003, Cochrane Database Syst Rev, CD000340
  3. Townsend E., 2007, Enabling Occupation II: Advancing an occupational therapy vision for health, well-being and justice through occupation
  4. Iwarsson S., 2001, Veten & Skapen HB & Slaug Data Management
  5. Iwarsson S., 2003, Disabil Rehabil, 25, 57
  6. Steinfeld E., 1979, Access to the Built Environments: A Review of the Literature
  7. Oswald W., 2005, Hogrefe
  8. Skelton D., 2004, Europe's Health Evidence Network
  9. Yardley L., 2005, Help the Aged

Cited by

See all 94

Metadata

Authors
Iwarsson, S., Horstmann, V., Carlsson, G., Oswald, F., & Wahl, H.-W.
Affiliations
  • Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden,
  • Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
  • Department of Psychological Aging Research, Institute of Psychology, University of Heidelberg, Germany
Venue
Clinical Rehabilitation
Published
2009-04-29
Volume
23
Issue
6
Pages
558-567
ISSN
  • 0269-2155
  • 1477-0873
Cited by
94
References
33
Language
en
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)

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: Person—environment fit predicts falls in older adults better than the consideration of environmental hazards only. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0269215508101740
The paper
Iwarsson, S., Horstmann, V., Carlsson, G., Oswald, F., & Wahl, H.-W. (2009). Person—environment fit predicts falls in older adults better than the consideration of environmental hazards only. Clinical Rehabilitation. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215508101740

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.