The objectives were to examine falls risk factors to determine how the magnitude of risk may differ between homebound and non-homebound older adults, and to describe falls prevention behaviors and participation in falls prevention education. A cross-sectional survey was conducted with convenience samples of community-dwelling older adults recruited through Meals on Wheels programs (homebound, n = 80) and senior centers (non-homebound, n = 84) in North Carolina. Data were collected during home visits and included an interview and medication inventory. Multivariate negative binomial regression with robust variance estimation modeled risk factors for falls. Risk factors for falls observed in both the homebound and non-homebound populations are consistent with what is known in the literature. However, the magnitude of the risk was higher in the homebound than in the non-homebound population with respect to vision impairments, number of high-risk and over-the-counter medications, and use of walking aids .Few participants reported participating in a falls prevention program.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 01 March 2021.
All research outputs
#11,518,249
of 33,779,198 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Applied Gerontology
#732
of 1,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,679
of 334,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Applied Gerontology
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,779,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 64th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 334,489 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
