Personality Traits and Health Behaviors as Predictors of Fall Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Findings From the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To examine whether personality traits and health behaviors predict falls in community-dwelling older adults. Methods: Longitudinal data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) at baseline (2011–2015) and follow-up two (2018–2021) were analyzed using logistic regression for 5270 adults aged 65 and older, with an alpha level of 0.05. Results: At baseline, participants’ mean age was 72 years, with 51.1% female. Most identified as White (96.7%) and had education beyond secondary (81.5%). Increased physical activity (OR: 1.012, 95% CI: 1.01–1.014), decreased alcohol consumption (OR: 1.634, 95% CI: 1.419–1.883), and smoking cessation (OR: 2.8, 95% CI: 2.198–3.568) increased fall risk, while conscientiousness (OR: 0.832, 95% CI: 0.792–0.874) and openness (OR: 0.959, 95% CI: 0.922–0.998) were protective at follow-up two. Personality changes significantly influence falls. Discussion: Findings highlight the complex interplay between personality traits, health behaviors, and falls, suggesting a one-size-fits-all approach to fall prevention may be insufficient.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| 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".