ArticleEClinicalMedicine2024
Video game-based application for fall risk assessment: a proof-of-concept cohort study.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Fall(s) are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality especially amongst elderly with polyneuropathy and cognitive decline. Conventional fall risk assessment tools are prone to low predictive values and do not address specific vulnerabilities. This study seeks to advance the development of an innovative, engaging fall prediction tool for a high-risk cohort diagnosed with diabetes. Methods: In this proof-of-concept cohort study, between July 01, 2020, and May 31, 2022, 152 participants with diabetes performed clinical examinations to estimate individual risks of fall (timed "up and go" (TUG) test, dynamic gait index (DGI), Berg-Balance-Scale (BBS)) and participated in a video game-based fall risk assessment with sensor-equipped insoles as steering units. The participants engaged in four distinct video games, each designed to address capabilities pertinent to prevent fall(s): skillfulness, reaction time, sensation, endurance, balance, and muscle strength. Data were collected during both, seated and standing gaming sessions. By data analyses using binary machine learning models a classification of participants was achieved and compared with actual fall events reported for the past 24 months. Findings: Overall 22 out of 152 participants (14.5%) underwent at least one episode of fall during the past 24 months. Adjusted risk classification accuracies of TUG, DGI, and BBS reached 58.7%, 58.3%, and 47.5%, respectively. Data analyses from gaming sessions in seated and standing positions yielded two models with six predictors from the four games with accuracies of 82.8% and 88.6% (area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve 0.84 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.77-0.91) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.85-0.97), respectively). Key capabilities that were distinctly different between the groups related to endurance (0.6 ± 0.1 vs. 0.5 ± 0.2; p = 0.03) and balance (0.7 ± 0.2 vs. 0.6 ± 0.2; p = 0.05). The AI-driven analysis allowed to extract a list of game features that showed highly significant predictive values, e.g., reaction times in specific task, deviation from ideal steering routes in parcours and pressure-related parameters. Interpretation: Thus, video game-based assessment of fall risk surpasses traditional clinical assessment tools and scores (e.g., TUG, DGI, and BBS) and may open a novel resource for patient evaluation in the future. Further research with larger, heterogeneous cohorts is needed to validate these findings and especially predict future fall risk probabilities in clinical as well as outpatient settings. Funding: This project was funded by the Ministry of Science, Economics, and Digitalization of the State of Saxony-Anhalt and the European Fund for Regional Development under the Autonomy in Old Age Program (Funding No: ZS/2016/05/78615, ZS/2018/12/95325) and Healthy Cognition and Nerve function (HeyCoNer, ZS/2023/12/183088).
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.