MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135593392 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000340

Interventions for preventing falls in elderly people

2003· review· en· W2135593392 on OpenAlexaff
Lesley D Gillespie, William J. Gillespie, M. Clare Robertson, Sarah E Lamb, Robert G. Cumming, Brian H. Rowe

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioCINAHLMeta-analysisFall preventionPhysical therapyConfidence intervalRelative riskPsychological interventionRandomized controlled trialClinical trialMEDLINEPoison controlGerontologyInjury preventionInternal medicineEmergency medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Approximately 30 per cent of people over 65 years of age and living in the community fall each year; the number is higher in institutions. Although less than one fall in 10 results in a fracture, a fifth of fall incidents require medical attention. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions designed to reduce the incidence of falls in elderly people (living in the community, or in institutional or hospital care). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group specialised register (January 2001), Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2001), MEDLINE (1966 to February 2001), EMBASE (1988 to 2001 Week 14), CINAHL (1982 to March 2001), The National Research Register, Issue 1, 2001, Current Controlled Trials (www.controlled-trials.com accessed 25 May 2001), and reference lists of articles. We also contacted researchers in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of interventions designed to minimise the effect of, or exposure to, risk factors for falling in elderly people. Main outcomes of interest were the number of fallers, or falls. Trials reporting only intermediate outcomes were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Data were pooled using the fixed effect model where appropriate. MAIN RESULTS: Interventions likely to be beneficial: ~bullet~A programme of muscle strengthening and balance retraining, individually prescribed at home by a trained health professional (3 trials, 566 participants, pooled relative risk (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) 0.66 to 0.98). ~bullet~A 15 week Tai Chi group exercise intervention (1 trial, 200 participants, risk ratio 0.51, 95%CI 0.36 to 0.73). ~bullet~Home hazard assessment and modification that is professionally prescribed for older people with a history of falling (1 trial, 530 participants, RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.84). A reduction in falls was seen both inside and outside the home. ~bullet~Withdrawal of psychotropic medication (1 trial, 93 participants, relative hazard 0.34, 95%CI 0.16 to 0.74). ~bullet~Multidisciplinary, multifactorial, health/environmental risk factor screening/intervention programmes, both for unselected community dwelling older people (data pooled from 3 trials, 1973 participants, pooled RR 0.73, 95%CI 0.63 to 0.86), and for older people with a history of falling, or selected because of known risk factors (data pooled from 2 trials, 713 participants, pooled RR 0.79, 95%CI 0.67 to 0.94). Interventions of unknown effectiveness: ~bullet~Group-delivered exercise interventions (9 trials, 2177 participants). ~bullet~Nutritional supplementation (1 trial, 50 participants). ~bullet~Vitamin D supplementation, with or without calcium (3 trials, 679 participants). ~bullet~Home hazard modification in association with advice on optimising medication (1 trial, 658 participants), or in association with an education package on exercise and reducing fall risk (1 trial, 3182 participants). ~bullet~Pharmacological therapy (raubasine-dihydroergocristine, 1 trial, 95 participants). ~bullet~Fall prevention programmes in institutional settings. ~bullet~Interventions using a cognitive/behavioural approach alone (2 trials, 145 participants). ~bullet~Home hazard modification for older people without a history of falling (1 trial, 530 participants). ~bullet~ Hormone replacement therapy (1 trial, 116 participants). Interventions unlikely to be beneficial: ~bullet~Brisk walking in women with an upper limb fracture in the previous two years (1 trial, 165 participants). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to prevent falls that are likely to be effective are now available; less is known about their effectiveness in preventing fall-related injuries. Costs per fall prevented have been established for four of the interventions and careful economic modelling in the context of the local healthcare system is important. Some potential interventions are of unknown effectiveness and further research is indicated.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.227
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1,422
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Cochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207