| Title |
Fall-risk prediction in older adults with cancer: an unmet need
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Supportive Care in Cancer, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00520-016-3312-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tanya M. Wildes, Brittany Depp, Graham Colditz, Susan Stark |
| Abstract |
Falls in older adults with cancer are more common than in noncancer controls, yet no fall-risk screening tool has been validated in this population. We undertook a cross-sectional pilot study of the Falls Risk Questionnaire (FRQ) in 21 adults aged ≥65 receiving systemic cancer therapy. Participants completed the FRQ, geriatric assessment measures, and a measure of fear-of-falling. The recruitment rate was 87.5 %, with 95.2 % completion of the FRQ and additional geriatric assessment and quality of life measures. The FRQ correlated significantly with the Timed Up and Go test (Pearson r 0.479, p = 0.028). In addition, the FRQ score correlated directly with fear-of-falling and inversely with QOL, particularly physical health and neurotoxicity subscales. In conclusion, the FRQ was feasible in older adults receiving cancer therapy and correlates with measures of physical performance, functional status, and fear-of-falling. The FRQ may prove to be a valuable fall-risk screening tool to implement fall-prevention interventions in this vulnerable population of older adults with cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 60% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Turkey | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 63 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 13 | 20% |
| Unknown | 18 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 25 | 39% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 20 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 September 2020.
All research outputs
#2,783,087
of 24,892,887 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#521
of 4,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,779
of 360,594 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#9
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,892,887 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,965 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 360,594 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.