SynthesisGeroScience2024
Performance of digital technologies in assessing fall risks among older adults with cognitive impairment: a systematic review.
Synthesis in GeroScience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Time-restricted feeding improves metabolic flexibility, promotes beiging, and mitigates fibro-inflammation in the adipose tissue of aged mice.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2026Article
- From technological closed-loop to human-machine trust: a systematic review of ethical and communication challenges of brain-computer interface in elderly care.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Review
- Application of machine learning for detecting high fall risk in middle-aged workers using video-based analysis of the first 3 steps.Journal of occupational health · 2025Article
- Wearable sensors and machine learning fusion-based fall risk prediction in covert cerebral small vessel disease.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Older adults with cognitive impairment (CI) are twice as likely to fall compared to the general older adult population. Traditional fall risk assessments may not be suitable for older adults with CI due to their reliance on attention and recall. Hence, there is an interest in using objective technology-based fall risk assessment tools to assess falls within this population. This systematic review aims to evaluate the features and performance of technology-based fall risk assessment tools for older adults with CI. A systematic search was conducted across several databases such as PubMed and IEEE Xplore, resulting in the inclusion of 22 studies. Most studies focused on participants with dementia. The technologies included sensors, mobile applications, motion capture, and virtual reality. Fall risk assessments were conducted in the community, laboratory, and institutional settings; with studies incorporating continuous monitoring of older adults in everyday environments. Studies used a combination of technology-based inputs of gait parameters, socio-demographic indicators, and clinical assessments. However, many missed the opportunity to include cognitive performance inputs as predictors to fall risk. The findings of this review support the use of technology-based fall risk assessment tools for older adults with CI. Further advancements incorporating cognitive measures and additional longitudinal studies are needed to improve the effectiveness and clinical applications of these assessment tools. Additional work is also required to compare the performance of existing methods for fall risk assessment, technology-based fall risk assessments, and the combination of these approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.