Development of the Sydney Falls Risk Screening Tool in brain injury rehabilitation: A multisite prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To develop a falls risk screening tool (FRST) sensitive to the traumatic brain injury rehabilitation population. BACKGROUND: Falls are the most frequently recorded patient safety incident within the hospital context. The inpatient traumatic brain injury rehabilitation population is one particular population that has been identified as at high risk of falls. However, no FRST has been developed for this patient population. Consequently in the traumatic brain injury rehabilitation population, there is the real possibility that nurses are using falls risk screening tools that have a poor clinical utility. DESIGN: Multisite prospective cohort study. METHODS: Univariate and multiple logistic regression modelling techniques (backward elimination, elastic net and hierarchical) were used to examine each variable's association with patients who fell. The resulting FRST's clinical validity was examined. RESULTS: Of the 140 patients in the study, 41 (29%) fell. Through multiple logistic regression modelling, 11 variables were identified as predictors for falls. Using hierarchical logistic regression, five of these were identified for inclusion in the resulting falls risk screening tool: prescribed mobility aid (such as, wheelchair or frame), a fall since admission to hospital, impulsive behaviour, impaired orientation and bladder and/or bowel incontinence. The resulting FRST has good clinical validity (sensitivity = 0.9; specificity = 0.62; area under the curve = 0.87; Youden index = 0.54). The tool was significantly more accurate (p = .037 on DeLong test) in discriminating fallers from nonfallers than the Ontario Modified STRATIFY FRST. CONCLUSION: A FRST has been developed using a comprehensive statistical framework, and evidence has been provided of this tool's clinical validity. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The developed tool, the Sydney Falls Risk Screening Tool, should be considered for use in brain injury rehabilitation populations.
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 | 0.014 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".