↓ Skip to main content

Cohort Randomised Controlled Trial of a Multifaceted Podiatry Intervention for the Prevention of Falls in Older People (The REFORM Trial)

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
27 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
197 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cohort Randomised Controlled Trial of a Multifaceted Podiatry Intervention for the Prevention of Falls in Older People (The REFORM Trial)
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2017
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0168712
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah Cockayne, Joy Adamson, Arabella Clarke, Belen Corbacho, Caroline Fairhurst, Lorraine Green, Catherine E. Hewitt, Kate Hicks, Anne-Maree Kenan, Sarah E. Lamb, Caroline McIntosh, Hylton B. Menz, Anthony C. Redmond, Zoe Richardson, Sara Rodgers, Wesley Vernon, Judith Watson, David J. Torgerson

Abstract

Falls are a major cause of morbidity among older people. A multifaceted podiatry intervention may reduce the risk of falling. This study evaluated such an intervention. Pragmatic cohort randomised controlled trial in England and Ireland. 1010 participants were randomised (493 to the Intervention group and 517 to Usual Care) to either: a podiatry intervention, including foot and ankle exercises, foot orthoses and, if required, new footwear, and a falls prevention leaflet or usual podiatry treatment plus a falls prevention leaflet. The primary outcome was the incidence rate of self-reported falls per participant in the 12 months following randomisation. Secondary outcomes included: proportion of fallers and those reporting multiple falls, time to first fall, fear of falling, Frenchay Activities Index, Geriatric Depression Scale, foot pain, health related quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. In the primary analysis were 484 (98.2%) intervention and 507 (98.1%) control participants. There was a small, non statistically significant reduction in the incidence rate of falls in the intervention group (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.05, p = 0.16). The proportion of participants experiencing a fall was lower (49.7 vs 54.9%, adjusted odds ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.00, p = 0.05) as was the proportion experiencing two or more falls (27.6% vs 34.6%, adjusted odds ratio 0.69, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.90, p = 0.01). There was an increase (p = 0.02) in foot pain for the intervention group. There were no statistically significant differences in other outcomes. The intervention was more costly but marginally more beneficial in terms of health-related quality of life (mean quality adjusted life year (QALY) difference 0.0129, 95% CI -0.0050 to 0.0314) and had a 65% probability of being cost-effective at a threshold of £30,000 per QALY gained. There was a small reduction in falls. The intervention may be cost-effective. ISRCTN ISRCTN68240461.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 197 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 197 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 31 16%
Student > Master 28 14%
Researcher 20 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 10%
Professor 8 4%
Other 30 15%
Unknown 61 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 47 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 17%
Psychology 13 7%
Sports and Recreations 9 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 2%
Other 22 11%
Unknown 69 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 27 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,652,690
of 24,870,516 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#20,579
of 215,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,499
of 427,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#478
of 4,278 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,870,516 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 215,423 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 427,772 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,278 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.