Ageing research reviews · 2026
Predictive accuracy of gait speed for falls: An individual participant data meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hicks Cameron, Menant Jasmine, Allen Natalie, Callisaya Michele L, Cameron Ian D, Cameron Michelle H, Canning Colleen G, Close Jacqueline, Dean Catherine M, Delbaere Kim, Gunn Hilary, Henderson Emily J, Hoang Phu, Latt Mark D, Menz Hylton B, Merom Dafna, Sherrington Catherine, Srikanth Velandai, Sturnieks Daina L, Taylor Morag E, Tiedemann Anne, Wettasinghe Asha H, Lord Stephen R
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Gait speed is included in the World Falls Guidelines (WFG) fall risk algorithm, yet its ability to discriminate fallers from non-fallers remains unclear. This individual participant data meta-analysis examined the discriminative ability of the WFG-recommended cut point (<0.8 m/s) and the performance of a higher cut point (<1.0 m/s) for predicting falls in community-dwelling older adults and clinical populations at elevated risk of falls.
METHODS: Individual data from 28 studies with a quantitative measure of gait speed and at least three months of prospectively reported falls were analysed using modified Poisson regression and Negative Binomial regression, followed by random-effects meta-analyses.
RESULTS: Eight studies involving community-dwelling older adults (n = 3627) and twenty studies involving clinical populations (n = 3981) were included. Walking at < 0.8 m/s was associated with increased risk of falling (Relative Risk: 1.27 (95%CI 1.17 - 1.38)) and fall rate (Incidence Rate Ratio: 1.54 (95%CI 1.34 - 1.77)). Diagnostic accuracy was modest (58%, specificity 77%, sensitivity 35%), with consistent findings across planned subgroup analyses for population, fall history, and sex. Analyses using the < 1.0 m/s cut point produced similar effect sizes and accuracy metrics but identified a larger proportion of fallers in both community-dwelling (30.1% vs. 8.7%) and clinical populations (66.9% vs. 46.0%) compared to the < 0.8 m/s cut point.
CONCLUSION: Slower gait speed is associated with an increased risk and rate of falling across both population groups, but discriminative accuracy is low. While the < 0.8 m/s threshold shows consistent associations, a < 1.0 m/s cut point may be more clinically useful in community-dwelling and clinical settings because it identifies more fallers.
METHODS: Individual data from 28 studies with a quantitative measure of gait speed and at least three months of prospectively reported falls were analysed using modified Poisson regression and Negative Binomial regression, followed by random-effects meta-analyses.
RESULTS: Eight studies involving community-dwelling older adults (n = 3627) and twenty studies involving clinical populations (n = 3981) were included. Walking at < 0.8 m/s was associated with increased risk of falling (Relative Risk: 1.27 (95%CI 1.17 - 1.38)) and fall rate (Incidence Rate Ratio: 1.54 (95%CI 1.34 - 1.77)). Diagnostic accuracy was modest (58%, specificity 77%, sensitivity 35%), with consistent findings across planned subgroup analyses for population, fall history, and sex. Analyses using the < 1.0 m/s cut point produced similar effect sizes and accuracy metrics but identified a larger proportion of fallers in both community-dwelling (30.1% vs. 8.7%) and clinical populations (66.9% vs. 46.0%) compared to the < 0.8 m/s cut point.
CONCLUSION: Slower gait speed is associated with an increased risk and rate of falling across both population groups, but discriminative accuracy is low. While the < 0.8 m/s threshold shows consistent associations, a < 1.0 m/s cut point may be more clinically useful in community-dwelling and clinical settings because it identifies more fallers.