Exploring the relationship between falls, fall‐related psychological concerns, and personality traits in adults : a scoping review protocol

Background and Aims: Personality traits, such as neuroticism and extraversion, are emerging as important predictors of falls. Despite their significance, existing fall prevention programs often overlook these traits, creating a notable research gap. This study aims to conduct a comprehensive scoping review to explore the existing literature on the relationships among personality traits, falls, and fall-related psychological concerns (FrPCs). Methods: This scoping review will adhere to the framework established by Arksey and O'Malley, incorporating extensions recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute and using the PRISMA-ScR checklist. A thorough search strategy will be employed, aligning with the population, concept, and context (PCC) selection criteria. Electronic databases, including MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus, will be searched from their inception to the present. Additionally, a manual search of the reference lists of identified and relevant full-text articles will be conducted. Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts, perform full-text reviews, and extract data from pertinent articles. Discussion: Personality traits are increasingly recognized as influential predictors of falls and related psychological concerns. This review aims to make a substantial contribution to the existing literature by being the first to comprehensively explore and provide a descriptive synthesis of the relationship between personality traits and falls, as well as FrPCs in adults. It is hoped that the outcomes of this review will enhance our comprehension of the role of personality traits in falls, potentially informing future research and strategies for this critical area of study. Scoping Review Registration: This scoping review protocol was registered with Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/KR74X)

Methodology and reporting quality of 544 studies related to ageing: a continued discussion in setting priorities for ageing research in Africa

# Background The quality assessment provides information on the overall strength of evidence and methodological quality of a research design, highlighting the level of confidence the reader should place on the findings for decision making. This paper aimed to assess the quality (methodology and quality of reporting) of ageing studies in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). # Method This paper is the second of a Four-Part Series paper of a previous systematic mapping review of peer-reviewed literature on ageing studies conducted in SSA. We updated the literature search to include additional 32 articles, a total of 544 articles included in this paper. Downs & Black checklist, Case Report guidelines checklist, the 45-items Lundgren et al. checklist, and the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool were used to assess the methodological quality of quantitative, case reports, qualitative, and mixed-method studies. Quality assessment was piloted and conducted in pairs for each study type. Depending on the checklist, each study was classified as excellent, good, fair, or poor. # Result Of the 544 articles, we performed the quality assessment of a total of 451 quantitative studies $$Randomized control trials (RCTs) and pre-post (n=15), longitudinal (n=122), case-control (n=15) and cross-sectional (n=300); 4 case reports, 74 qualitative and 15 mixed-method studies. Only 20.4$$. The remaining 433 were rated as moderate quality (n=292, 53.7%), fair quality (n = 96, 17.7%) and poor quality (n = 45, 8.2%). Most (80%) quantitative articles' sample size is small, resulting in insufficient power to detect a clinically or significant important effect. Three-quarter (75%) of the qualitative studies did not report their research team characteristics and a reflexivity component of the 45-items Lundgren et al. checklist. Mixed-method studies with low quality did not report the qualitative studies properly. # Conclusion We conclude that the methodological and quality reporting of published studies on ageing in SSA show variable quality, albeit primarily moderate quality, against high quality. Studies with a large sample size are recommended, and qualitative researchers should provide a section on research team members' characteristics and reflexivity in their paper or as an appendix

EQUIVALENCE TESTING OF WEARABLE TECHNOLOGIES DURING SIMULATED ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING

BACKGROUND: Step-based metrics, including steps/day and cadence (steps/min), are well established in the physical activity literature. However, there remains a need for robust criterion validation of step-counting wearable technologies across a wide range of ambulatory movements. Validation studies have typically examined device accuracy during rhythmic treadmill or overground walking, with few studies examining step-count accuracy during simulated activities of daily living (SADL). PURPOSE: To determine the step-count criterion validity of wearable devices during SADLs. METHODS: Participants (N = 260, 52.7±18.9 years, BMI 25.6±3.7 kg/m2, 50% women) from the CADENCE-Adults study, completed a series of laboratory-based SADLs, including folding laundry, vacuuming, stair stepping, and preferred pace overground walking. Participants wore devices on their waist (Yamax Digiwalker SW200 [SW200], New Lifestyles NL1000 [NL], ActiGraph GT9X [AG] and ActiCal [AC]), thigh (activPal [AP]), and ankle (StepWatch [SW]). The criterion measure was directly observed hand-counted steps (both in real-time and verified using video recording). Equivalence testing plots were generated to assess the criterion validity of each device. Unlike traditional null hypothesis testing, which seeks to determine whether there were any statistical differences between devices, equivalence testing evaluates agreement between the criterion and test device. The equivalence zone was set at ±0.2 SD of the criterion step count for each SADL. Devices were deemed equivalent to the criterion when their mean error and the 95% CI fell within the equivalence zone. RESULTS: On average, devices tended to underestimate (-4, -31, -28, -6 steps/min) for folding laundry, vacuuming, stair stepping, and overground walking, respectively. No devices fell inside the equivalence zone for folding laundry, vacuuming, and stair stepping. For preferred pace overground walking, only the SW and AP fell within the equivalence zone. CONCLUSIONS: No device performed well across the full range of activities; however, the SW and AP were deemed equivalent during preferred pace overground walking. Device manufacturers should aim to refine step algorithms to improve step-count accuracy across a wider range of ambulatory activities. FUNDING: NIH-NIA-5R01AG04902