Home › Research › Clinical safety
Risk factors in falls among the elderly according to extrinsic and intrinsic precipitating causes
Bueno-Cavanillas A, Padilla-Ruiz F, Jiménez-Moleón JJ, Peinado-Alonso CA, Gálvez-Vargas R.. European journal of epidemiology, 2000-01-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
The aim of this prospective cohort study was to identify the risk factors involved in falls in 190 elderly residents of two geriatric centres in Granada (Andalusia, Spain). Because different types of falls may be associated with different factors, falls were classified according to the precipitating cause, either extrinsic or intrinsic. The incidence density and the ratios for crude and adjusted density were calculated. Cox proportional risk analysis was used to calculate adjusted incidence density ratios. Of the 121 falls identified, 63 (52.1%) had a extrinsic precipitating cause, 43 (35.5%) had an intrinsic precipitating cause, and no precipitating cause was determined in 15 falls. The rate of falls with an extrinsic precipitating cause was 0.39 per person per year, while falls with an intrinsic precipitating cause showed a frequency of 0.27 per person per year. For falls with an extrinsic precipitating cause, the most significant risk factors were: age, diabetes mellitus, a history of falling, and treatment with neuroleptics or oral bronchodilators. The number of illnesses acted as a protective factor. For falls with an intrinsic precipitating cause, the independent risk factors were: age, diabetes, dementia, alterations of gait and balance, previous falls, and treatment with digitalins, neuroleptics or antidepressants. These results suggest that the susceptibility to a fall with an intrinsic precipitating cause is easier to identify and has a greater potential for being controlled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Bueno-Cavanillas, A., Padilla-Ruiz, F., Jiménez-Moleón, J. J., Peinado-Alonso, C. A., & Gálvez-Vargas, R. (2000). Risk factors in falls among the elderly according to extrinsic and intrinsic precipitating causes. European journal of epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1007636531965
Vancouver
Bueno-Cavanillas A, Padilla-Ruiz F, Jiménez-Moleón JJ, Peinado-Alonso CA, Gálvez-Vargas R. Risk factors in falls among the elderly according to extrinsic and intrinsic precipitating causes. European journal of epidemiology. 2000. doi:10.1023/a:1007636531965. PMID: 11297228.
BibTeX
@article{buenocavanillas2000-11297228,
author = {Bueno-Cavanillas, A. and Padilla-Ruiz, F. and Jiménez-Moleón, J. J. and Peinado-Alonso, C. A. and Gálvez-Vargas, R.},
title = {{Risk factors in falls among the elderly according to extrinsic and intrinsic precipitating causes}},
journal = {European journal of epidemiology},
year = {2000},
doi = {10.1023/a:1007636531965},
pmid = {11297228},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1007636531965}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Because different types of falls may be associated with different factors, falls were classified according to the precipitating cause, either extrinsic or intrinsic.
- For falls with an extrinsic precipitating cause, the most significant risk factors were: age, diabetes mellitus, a history of falling, and treatment with neuroleptics or oral bronchodilators.
- These results suggest that the susceptibility to a fall with an intrinsic precipitating cause is easier to identify and has a greater potential for being controlled.
Study details
- Study designcohort study
- Effect size52.1%; 35.5%
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 55/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for sample size, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 32 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 55 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (European journal of epidemiology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A cohort study following people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2000 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 11297228) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 32 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 32 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 55 out of 100. |
| Total | 55 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Clinical safety
Also tagged “palliative”
858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “palliative”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.