Relationship Among Fear of Falling, Physical Performance, and Physical Characteristics of the Rural Elderly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between the fear of falling, physical performance, and physical characteristics in an elderly population. DESIGN: This study is a cross-sectional study with 883 community dwellers 60 yrs or older from a rural area. They completed surveys and evaluations including demographics, the Korean version of the Falls Efficacy Scale-International, the Short Physical Performance Battery, the timed up and go (TUG) test, grip strength, and bone mineral density. RESULTS: The subjects who had experienced a fall showed lower physical performance than those who had not experienced a fall. Regardless of a previous experience of a fall, the score on the Korean version of the Falls Efficacy Scale-International had a positive correlation with TUG time and negative correlations with the score on the Short Physical Performance Battery, grip strength, and bone mineral density. Compared with the group without the fear of falling, the group with the fear of falling showed a lower score on the Short Physical Performance Battery, longer TUG time, weaker grip strength, and lower bone mineral density. The subjects with osteoporosis showed significantly higher scores on the Korean version of the Falls Efficacy Scale-International. CONCLUSIONS: The experience of falls had a significant relationship with the fear of falling and physical performance, and greater fear of falling was related to poorer physical performance, independent of the experience of falls. This result implies that more attention should be paid to seniors with the fear of falling and the experience of falls, and screening and consequent intervention for fall prevention should be warranted in this population. For this purpose, the TUG test may be recommended as a screening tool because TUG time reflects the fear of falling and the experience of falls as well as physical performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".