MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394918280 · doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2024.03.108

Characteristics and Consequences of Falls in People Who Use Wheelchairs in Long-Term Care Settings

2024· article· en· W4394918280 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Makenna Snyder, Tobia Zanotto, Emilia Potts, Jacob J. Sosnoff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation ResearchGenentechNational Institutes of HealthNational Multiple Sclerosis Society
KeywordsMedicineTerm (time)Long-term careMedical emergencyGerontologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to understand the characteristics and consequences of falls in individuals using wheelchairs in long-term care settings. DESIGN: Observational analysis of real-world falls in long-term care. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Residents using wheelchairs from 2 long-term care facilities in British Columbia, Canada (n = 32 participants, mean age = 84.7 years, 12 women). METHODS: Two raters used the validated Falls Video Analysis Questionnaire, adapted from the original version, to assess the causal, behavioral, and environmental aspects of falls from wheelchairs. RESULTS: A total of 58 wheelchair fall videos were identified out of 300 total videos that were collected from 2007 to 2014. Wheelchair falls were most often caused by incorrect transfer or shift of body weight (70.7%). Participants most often fell backward with 89.7% striking their pelvis. Individuals using wheelchairs had limited protective response, with only 10.3% demonstrating a step response. Improper brake position contributed to 67.2% of falls. No serious fall-related injuries were reported. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The findings highlight the unique nature of falls in older adults who use wheelchairs in long-term care settings. Overall, the results of this study support clinical practice and the critical need for developing specialized fall prevention and fall detection interventions for individuals who use wheelchairs in long-term care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.360 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Medical Directors AssociationSame topicAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityFrench-language works237,207