MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226055111 · doi:10.1186/s12877-021-02641-9

Fall prevention in community-dwelling adults with mild to moderate cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021· review· en· W4226055111 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Geriatrics · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsCARE CanadaWestern UniversityOntario Neurotrauma FoundationMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario Neurotrauma FoundationMcMaster UniversityMax Bell Foundation
KeywordsMedicineFear of fallingMeta-analysisPsychological interventionFall preventionDementiaRandomized controlled trialStrictly standardized mean differencePhysical therapyBalance (ability)CognitionPoison controlGerontologyGaitFalls in older adultsRehabilitationInjury preventionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychiatryInternal medicineDiseaseEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment (CI) increases an individual's risk of falls due to the role cognition plays in gait control. Older adults with dementia fall 2-3 times more than cognitively healthy older adults and 60-80% of people with dementia fall annually. Practitioners require evidence-based fall prevention best practices to reduce the risk of falls in cognitively impaired adults living in the community. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the effectiveness of primary and secondary fall prevention interventions in reducing falls and fear of falling, and improving gait, balance, and functional mobility. We searched 7 databases for fall prevention interventions involving community-dwelling adults ≥50 years with mild to moderate CI. Reviewers screened citations, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence (GRADE). We assessed statistical and methodological heterogeneity and performed a meta-analysis of studies including subgroup analysis based on intervention and risk of bias groupings. RESULTS: Five hundred nine community-dwelling adults (mean age 67.5 to 84.0 years) with mild to moderate CI from 12 randomized or clinical controlled trials (RCTs/CCTs) were included in this review. Eight studies were exercise interventions, 3 were multifactorial, and 1 provided medication treatment. Fall prevention interventions had significant effects of medium magnitude on fear of falling (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.73 [- 1.10, - 0.36]), balance (SMD 0.66 [0.19, 1.12]), and functional mobility measured as Timed Up and Go test (SMD -0.56 [- 0.94, - 0.17]) and significant effects of small magnitude on gait control (SMD 0.26 [0.08, 0.43]) all with moderate certainty of evidence. The meta-analysis showed no significant effects for falls (number of events or falls incidence). Sub-analysis showed that exercise and low risk of bias studies remained significant for balance and perceived risk of falls. CONCLUSION: The effect of fall prevention interventions on direct outcomes, such as falls, remains unclear in cognitively impaired individuals. Exercise interventions are effective at improving fall risk factors, however, high quality studies with longer follow-up and adequate sample sizes are needed to determine their effectiveness on falls directly. There remains a gap in terms of effective fall prevention interventions for older adults with CI.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.128
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.289 · 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