Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Trials
Published in: Trials 1/2022

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Research

Factors associated with reporting of the Prevention of Falls Network Europe (ProFaNE) core outcome set domains in randomized trials on falls in older people: a citation analysis and correlational study

Authors: Alexandra M. B. Korall, Dawn Steliga, Sarah E. Lamb, Stephen R. Lord, Rasheda Rabbani, Kathryn M. Sibley

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Core outcome sets are advocated as a means to standardize outcome reporting across randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and reduce selective outcome reporting. In 2005, the Prevention of Falls Network Europe (ProFaNE) published a core outcome set identifying five domains that should be measured and reported, at a minimum, in RCTs or meta-analysis on falls in older people. As reporting of all five domains of the ProFaNE core outcome set has been minimal, we set out to investigate factors associated with reporting of the ProFaNE core outcome set domains in a purposeful sample of RCTs on falls in older people.

Methods

We conducted a systematic citation analysis to identify all reports of RCTs focused on falls in older people that cited the ProFaNE core outcome set between October 2005 and July 2021. We abstracted author-level, study-level, and manuscript-level data and whether each domain of the ProFaNE core outcome set was reported. We used penalized LASSO regression to identify factors associated with the mean percentage of ProFaNE core outcome set domains reported.

Results

We identified 85 eligible reports of RCTs. Articles were published between 2007 and 2021, described 75 unique RCTs, and were authored by 76 unique corresponding authors. The percentage of ProFaNE core outcome set domains reported ranged from 0 to 100%, with a median of 40% and mean (standard deviation, SD) of 52.2% (25.1). RCTs funded by a non-industry source reported a higher mean percentage of domains than RCTs without a non-industry funding source (estimated mean difference = 17.5%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.8–33.2). RCTs examining exercise (15.4%; 95% CI 1.9–28.9) or multi-component/factorial (17.4%; 95% CI 4.7–30.1) interventions each reported a higher mean percentage of domains than RCTs examining other intervention types.

Conclusions

We found that RCTs funded by at least one non-industry source, examining exercise or multi-component/factorial interventions, reported the highest percentages of ProFaNE core outcome set domains. Findings may help inform strategies to increase the impact of the ProFaNE core outcome set. Ultimately, this may lead to enhanced knowledge of the effectiveness and safety of interventions to prevent and/or manage falls in older people.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Sibley KM, Voth J, Munce SE, Straus SE, Jaglal SB. Chronic disease and falls in community-dwelling Canadians over 65 years old: a population-based study exploring associations with number and pattern of chronic conditions. BMC Geriatr. 2014;14:22.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
2.
Lord SR, Sherrington C, Hicks C. Epidemiology of falls and fall-related injuries. In: Sherrington C, Lord SR, Naganathan V, editors. Falls in older people: risk factors, strategies for prevention and implications for practice. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2021. p. 3–22.CrossRef
3.
Bergen G, Stevens MR, Burns ER. Falls and fall injuries among adults aged >/=65 years - United States, 2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016;65(37):993–8.PubMedCrossRef
4.
5.
Kramarow E, Chen LH, Hedegaard H, Warner M. Deaths from unintentional injury among adults aged 65 and over: United States, 2000–2013. NCHS Data Brief. 2015;199:199.
6.
7.
Rubenstein LZ. Falls in older people: epidemiology, risk factors and strategies for prevention. Age and Ageing. 2006;35(suppl 2):ii37–41.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Büchele G, Becker C, Cameron ID, König H-H, Robinovitch S, Rapp K. Predictors of serious consequences of falls in residential aged care: analysis of more than 70,000 falls from residents of Bavarian nursing homes. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2014;15(8):559–63.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Harvey LA, Close JC. Traumatic brain injury in older adults: characteristics, causes and consequences. Injury. 2012;43(11):1821–6.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Fletcher PC, Hirdes JP. Restriction in activity associated with fear of falling among community-based seniors using home care services. Age Ageing. 2004;33(3):273–9.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Scheffer AC, Schuurmans MJ, van Dijk N, van der Hooft T, de Rooij SE. Fear of falling: measurement strategy, prevalence, risk factors and consequences among older persons. Age Ageing. 2008;37(1):19–24.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Friedman SM, Munoz B, West SK, Rubin GS, Fried LP. Falls and fear of falling: which comes first? a longitudinal prediction model suggests strategies for primary and secondary prevention. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2002;50(8):1329–35.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Choi NG, Bruce ML, DiNitto DM, Marti CN, Kunik ME. Fall worry restricts social engagement in older adults. J Aging Health. 2020;32(5–6):422–31.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Choi NG, Gell NM, DiNitto DM, Marti CN, Kunik ME. Depression and activity-limiting fall worry among older adults: longitudinal reciprocal relationships. Int Psychogeriatr. 2020;32(4):495–504.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Choi NG, Marti CN, DiNitto DM, Kunik ME. Longitudinal associations of falls and depressive symptoms in older adults. Gerontologist. 2019;59(6):1141–51.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Scuffham P, Chaplin S, Legood R. Incidence and costs of unintentional falls in older people in the United Kingdom. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003;57(9):740–4.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
17.
Florence CS, Bergen G, Atherly A, Burns E, Stevens J, Drake C. Medical costs of fatal and nonfatal falls in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018;66(4):693–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
18.
19.
Sherrington C, Michaleff ZA, Fairhall N, Paul SS, Tiedemann A, Whitney J, et al. Exercise to prevent falls in older adults: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2017;51(24):1750–8.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Tricco AC, Thomas SM, Veroniki AA, Hamid JS, Cogo E, Strifler L, et al. Comparisons of interventions for preventing falls in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2017;318(17):1687–99.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
21.
Kirkham JJ, Altman DG, Chan AW, Gamble C, Dwan KM, Williamson PR. Outcome reporting bias in trials: a methodological approach for assessment and adjustment in systematic reviews. BMJ. 2018;362: k3802.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
Williamson PR, de Avila OR, Clarke M, Gorst SL, Hughes K, Kirkham JJ, et al. Assessing the relevance and uptake of core outcome sets (an agreed minimum collection of outcomes to measure in research studies) in Cochrane systematic reviews: a review. BMJ Open. 2020;10(9):e036562.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
23.
24.
Williamson PR, Altman DG, Blazeby JM, Clarke M, Devane D, Gargon E, et al. Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider. Trials. 2012;13:132.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
25.
26.
27.
28.
Prinsen CA, Vohra S, Rose MR, Boers M, Tugwell P, Clarke M, et al. How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a “Core Outcome Set” - a practical guideline. Trials. 2016;17(1):449.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
Lamb SE, Jørstad-Stein EC, Hauer K, Becker C. Development of a common outcome data set for fall injury prevention trials: the prevention of falls network Europe consensus. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53(9):1618–22.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Copsey B, Hopewell S, Becker C, Cameron ID, Lamb SE. Appraising the uptake and use of recommendations for a common outcome data set for clinical trials: a case study in fall injury prevention. Trials. 2016;17(1):131.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
31.
Hughes KL, Kirkham JJ, Clarke M, Williamson PR. Assessing the impact of a research funder’s recommendation to consider core outcome sets. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(9):e0222418.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
32.
Smith TO, Collier T, Sheehan KJ, Sherrington C. The uptake of the hip fracture core outcome set: analysis of 20 years of hip fracture trials. Age Ageing. 2019;48(4):595–8.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Fletcher J, Sheehan KJ, Smith TO. Barriers to uptake of the hip fracture core outcome set: an international survey of 80 hip fracture trialists. Clin Trials. 2020;17(6):712–6.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Wallace SJ, Sullivan B, Rose TA, Worrall L, Le Dorze G, Shrubsole K. Core outcome set use in poststroke aphasia treatment research: examining barriers and facilitators to implementation using the theoretical domains framework. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2021;64(10):3969–82.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, Hovmand P, Aarons G, Bunger A, et al. Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011;38(2):65–76.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4:50.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
37.
Kolanowski A, Gilmore-Bykovskyi A, Hill N, Massimo L, Mogle J. Measurement challenges in research with individuals with cognitive impairment. Res Gerontol Nurs. 2019;12(1):7–15.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
38.
Lancee M, Lemmens CMC, Kahn RS, Vinkers CH, Luykx JJ. Outcome reporting bias in randomized-controlled trials investigating antipsychotic drugs. Transl Psychiatry. 2017;7(9):e1232.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
39.
James G, Witten D, Hastie T, Tibshirani R. An introduction to statistical learning: with applications in R. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Springer New York; 2021.
40.
Tibshirani R. Regression shrinkage and selection via the Lasso. J Roy Stat Soc: Ser B (Methodol). 1996;58(1):267–88.
41.
Cohen RA. Introducing the GLMSELECT procedure for model selection. In Proceedings of the Thirty-First Annual SAS Users Group International Conference 2006 Mar 26 (pp. 4770–4792).
42.
SAS Institute Inc. 2015. SAS/STAT® 14.1 User’s guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
43.
Mallows CL. Some comments on Cp. Technometrics. 2000;42(1):87–94.
44.
45.
Chopra SS. MSJAMA: Industry funding of clinical trials: benefit or bias? JAMA. 2003;290(1):113–4.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Kirkham JJ, Davis K, Altman DG, Blazeby JM, Clarke M, Tunis S, et al. Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Development: the COS-STAD recommendations. PLoS Med. 2017;14(11):e1002447.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
47.
48.
Kirkham JJ, Clarke M, Williamson PR. A methodological approach for assessing the uptake of core outcome sets using ClinicalTrials.gov: findings from a review of randomised controlled trials of rheumatoid arthritis. BMJ. 2017;357:j2262.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
49.
50.
Metadata
Title
Factors associated with reporting of the Prevention of Falls Network Europe (ProFaNE) core outcome set domains in randomized trials on falls in older people: a citation analysis and correlational study
Authors
Alexandra M. B. Korall
Dawn Steliga
Sarah E. Lamb
Stephen R. Lord
Rasheda Rabbani
Kathryn M. Sibley
Publication date
01-12-2022
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06642-w

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Trials 1/2022 Go to the issue

Research

Measuring implementation fidelity in a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial: development and use of a quantitative multi-component approach

Research

The People’s Trial: supporting the public’s understanding of randomised trials

Study protocol

Rationale and methods of the Antioxidant and NMDA receptor blocker Weans Anoxic brain damage of KorEa OHCA patients (AWAKE) trial

Study protocol

Randomized double-blind controlled trial to assess the efficacy of intravenous acetaminophen associated with strong opioids in the treatment of acute pain in adult cancer patients: study protocol

Methodology

What is the purpose of clinical trial monitoring?

Update

Impact of receiving recorded mental health recovery narratives on quality of life in people experiencing non-psychosis mental health problems (NEON-O Trial): updated randomised controlled trial protocol