Table 4.
Outcomes in the proactive and reactive population according to grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE)
| Proactive population | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Outcomes | Hedge’s g (CI) | Number of participants (studies) | Quality of evidence (GRADE) |
| physical activity, intervention end |
0.13 (−0.04, 0.30) | 1,704 (5) | ⊕ ⊕ ⊝⊝ac Low |
| physical activity, 12- month follow-up |
0.00 (−0.12, 0.12) | 756 (2) | ⊕ ⊕ ⊕⊝d Moderate |
| falls-related self-efficacy intervention end | −0.03 (−0.11, 0.05) | 1,816 (3) | ⊕ ⊕ ⊕⊝e Moderate |
| falls-related self-efficacy 24-month follow-up |
0.63 (−0.16, 1.43) | 681 (2) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝abd Very low |
| Reactive population | |||
| Outcomes | Hedge’s g (CI) | Number of participants (studies) | Quality of evidence (GRADE) |
| physical activity, intervention end |
1.32 (0.31, 2.32) | 587 (7) | ⊕ ⊕ ⊝⊝af Low |
| physical activity, 12- month follow-up |
0.62 (0.44, 0.80) | 449 (5) | ⊕ ⊕ ⊝⊝af Low |
| endurance, intervention end | 0.24 (0.04, 0.44) | 392 (4) | ⊕ ⊕ ⊕⊝g Moderate |
| falls-related self-efficacy intervention end | 0.27 (−0.18, 0.71) | 429 (4) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝abg Very low |
| able to mobilise outdoor, intervention end* | 0.90 (−1.03, 2.82) | 285 (2) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝abg Very low |
| able to mobilise outdoor, final follow-up* |
0.18 (−0.38, 0.75) | 253 (2) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝abg Very low |
| satisfied with outdoor mobility, intervention end* | 0.66 (−0.28, 1.60) | 663 (2) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝abi Very low |
| satisfied with outdoor mobility, final follow-up* |
0.46 (−0.27, 1.19) | 600 (2) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝abi Very low |
*Log Odds Ratio (CI)
aInconsistency, I2 > 45%
bImprecision
cRisk of Bias: random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessor, blinding of participants and personnel
dRisk of Bias: blinding of outcome assessor, blinding of participants and personnel
eRisk of Bias: blinding of outcome assessor, allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel
fRisk of Bias: random sequence generation, allocation concealment, incomplete outcome data, blinding of outcome assessor, blinding of participants and personnel
gRisk of Bias: allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessor, blinding of participants and personnel
iRisk of Bias: blinding of participants and personnel
CI: confidence interval.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality ⊕ ⊕ ⊕⊕: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality ⊕ ⊕ ⊕⊝: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality ⊕ ⊕ ⊝⊝: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality ⊕⊝⊝⊝: We are very uncertain about the estimate.