Relationship Between Lower Limb Function and Fall Prevalence in Ambulatory Adults With Spinal Cord Injury: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Falls are common, detrimental events among ambulatory individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). Following SCI, changes to lower limb function are probable and likely to impact an individual's fall risk, yet no comprehensive review has been completed on the topic. Objectives: This study systematically reviewed data on the relationship between lower limb function and fall prevalence in ambulatory individuals with SCI. Methods: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts/titles and then full articles. Study details, participants' characteristics, lower limb function assessed, and fall-related data were extracted from the studies. A qualitative analysis of the relationship between lower limb function and fall prevalence was performed. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Results: The search yielded 1553 articles. Eight prospective, two retrospective, and three cross-sectional studies met the eligibility criteria. These studies ranged from low to high risk of bias. Overall, the qualitative analysis provided little evidence to support the relationship between lower limb function recorded by clinical measures and fall prevalence. Conclusion: This review highlights the inconsistent relationship between lower limb function and falls prevalence in ambulatory adults with SCI. Greater uniformity in methodology and consistent categorization of fallers and nonfallers among researchers is necessary to move the field forward. Investigating additional factors such as behavior traits, assistive device use, and environmental risk factors may be appropriate in understanding fall prevalence in this population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".