Strategies to reduce the risk of falling: Cohort study analysis with 1-year follow-up in community dwelling older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: According to the CDC, falls rank among the leading causes of accidental death in the United States, resulting in significant health care costs annually. In this paper we present information about everyday lifestyle decisions of the older adult that may help reduce the risk of falling. We pursued two lines of inquiry: first, we identify and then test known mutable fall risk factors and ask how the resolution of such problems correlates with changes in fall rates. Second, we identify a series of everyday lifestyle options that persons may follow and then ask, does such engagement (e.g., engagement in exercise programs) lessen the older adult's risk of falling and if it does, will the relationship hold as the count of risk factors increases? METHODS: Using a secondary analysis of lifestyle choices and risk changes that may explain fall rates over one year, we drew on a data set of 13,623 community residing elders in independent housing sites from 24 US states. All older adults were assessed at baseline, and a subset assessed one year later (n = 4,563) using two interRAI tools: the interRAI Community Health Assessment and interRAI Wellness Assessment. RESULTS: For the vast majority of risk measures, problem resolution is followed by lower rate of falls. This is true for physical measures such as doing housework, meal preparation, unsteady gait, transferring, and dressing the lower body. Similarly, this pattern is observed for clinical measures such as depression, memory, vision, dizziness, and fatigue. Among the older adults who had a falls risk at the baseline assessment, about 20 % improve, that is, they had a decreased falls rate when the problem risk improved. This outcome suggests that improvement of physical or clinical states potentially may result in a decreased falls rate. Additionally, physical exercise and cognitive activities are associated with a lower rate of falls. CONCLUSIONS: The resolution of risk problems and physical and cognitive lifestyle choices are related to lower fall rates in elders in the community. The results presented here point to specific areas, that when targeted, may reduce the risk of falls. In addition, when there is problem resolution for specific clinical conditions, a decreased risk for falls also may occur.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".