ArticleResearch in health and medicine2025
Accuracy of Physical Function-based Fall Risk Assessments Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: An ROC Analysis.
Article in Research in health and medicine, 2025. 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.
- Associations Between Fall Risk and Lower Limb Joint Range of Motion During Sit-to-Stand Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults.Research in health and medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Physical function assessments, such as the Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG) and Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), are commonly used to evaluate fall risk among older adults, yet they may misclassify individuals. Center-of-pressure postural sway path length (PS) is a criterion for assessing fall risk, but it is unclear how TUG and SPPB compare. This study examined the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of these three assessments in classifying older adults as high or low fall risk. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 234 community-dwelling older adults (women=203, age=75.0±7.0 years, height=159±7.9cm, Body Mass Index=30.0±6.3kg/m Results: Participants had a mean TUG time of 10.2±6.3 seconds, SPPB score of 8.7±2.3, and PS of 34.7±21.3cm. Both TUG (high risk=10, low risk=224; X Conclusions: TUG and SPPB both demonstrated low sensitivity and accuracy, suggesting that they may be better as measures of physical function rather than fall risk. Clinicians may benefit from using PS or other criterion measures to screen for fall risk.
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.