↓ Skip to main content

Does the timed up and go test predict future falls among British community-dwelling older people? Prospective cohort study nested within a randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, April 2015
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 (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
119 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
249 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
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
Does the timed up and go test predict future falls among British community-dwelling older people? Prospective cohort study nested within a randomised controlled trial
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12877-015-0039-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gotaro Kojima, Tahir Masud, Denise Kendrick, Richard Morris, Sheena Gawler, Jonathan Treml, Steve Iliffe

Abstract

Falling is common among older people. The Timed-Up-and-Go Test (TUG) is recommended as a screening tool for falls but its predictive value has been challenged. The objectives of this study were to examine the ability of TUG to predict future falls and to estimate the optimal cut-off point to identify those with higher risk for future falls. This is a prospective cohort study nested within a randomised controlled trial including 259 British community-dwelling older people ≥65 years undergoing usual care. TUG was measured at baseline. Prospective diaries captured falls over 24 weeks. A Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis determined the optimal cut-off point to classify future falls risk with sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of TUG times. Logistic regression models examined future falls risk by TUG time. Sixty participants (23%) fell during the 24 weeks. The area under the curve was 0.58 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 0.49-0.67, p = 0.06), suggesting limited predictive value. The optimal cut-off point was 12.6 seconds and the corresponding sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were 30.5%, 89.5%, 46.2%, and 81.4%. Logistic regression models showed each second increase in TUG time (adjusted for age, gender, comorbidities, medications and past history of two falls) was significantly associated with future falls (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.00-1.19, p = 0.05). A TUG time ≥12.6 seconds (adjusted OR = 3.94, 95% CI = 1.69-9.21, p = 0.002) was significantly associated with future falls, after the same adjustments. TUG times were significantly and independently associated with future falls. The ability of TUG to predict future falls was limited but with high specificity and negative predictive value. TUG may be most useful in ruling in those with a high risk of falling rather than as a primary measure in the ascertainment of risk.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 249 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 245 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 39 16%
Student > Master 35 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 10%
Researcher 19 8%
Student > Postgraduate 16 6%
Other 47 19%
Unknown 67 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 54 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 48 19%
Sports and Recreations 21 8%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Other 29 12%
Unknown 85 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 23 November 2021.
All research outputs
#2,231,782
of 22,797,621 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#555
of 3,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,830
of 264,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#9
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,797,621 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,180 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 264,242 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.