Retrospective Analysis of Circumstances of Falls and Related Injuries across Levels of Care in Older Adult Retirement Home Facilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Towards developing more effective interventions for fall-related injuries, this study analysed a novel database from six retirement home facilities over a 4-year period comprising 1,877 fallers and 12,445 falls. Falls were characterized based on location, activity, injury site, and type, and the database was stratified across four levels of care: Independent Living, Retirement Care, Assisted Care, and Memory care. Falls most occurred within the bedroom (62.8%), and during unknown (38.1%), walking (20.2%), and transfer tasks (14.6%). Approximately one in three (37%) of all falls resulted in an injury, most commonly involving the upper limb (31.8%), head (26.3%), and lower limb (22.2%), resulting in skin tears (35.3%), aches/pains (29.1%), or bruises (28.0%). While fall location, activity, and injury site were different across levels of care, injury type was not. The data from this study can assist in targeting fall-related injury prevention strategies across levels of care within retirement facilities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".