Skip to main content

Table 2 Summary estimates of sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios for all included studies and for sensitivity analyses at a cut point of ≥13.5 seconds

From: Is the Timed Up and Go test a useful predictor of risk of falls in community dwelling older adults: a systematic review and meta- analysis

Application of TUG test

No. of studies (patients)

Sensitivity (95% CI)

Variance logit sensitivity (95% CI)

Specificity (95% CI)

Variance logit specificity (95% CI)

All studies

10 (n = 2,314)

0.32 (0.14-0.57)

2.62 (0.94-7.29)

0.73 (0.51-0.88)

2.24 (0.76-6.63)

Studies where TUG was administered as fast as possible excluded

8 (n = 1,872)

0.44 (0.20-0.71)

2.52 (0.78-8.1)

0.71 (0.49-0.86)

1.7 (0.52-5.56)

Studies with duration of follow up > or < one year excluded

7 (n = 1,858)

0.33 (0.11-0.68)

3.58 (1.07-12.0)

0.70 (0.37-0.90)

3.33 (0.89-12.49)

Studies with selection bias excluded

6 (n = 1,253)

0.29 (0.10-0.60)

2.31 (0.56-9.56)

0.64 (0.20-0.93)

5.11 (0.86-30.47)

Studies with unclear/no details on index test excluded

6 (n = 1,636)

0.33 (0.17-0.54)

1.05 (0.30-3.63)

0.71 (0.58-0.81)

0.46 (0.12-1.65)

Studies with unclear/no definition ‘fall’ excluded

6 (n = 1,750)

0.28 (0.11-0.54)

1.82 (0.55-6.05)

0.81 (0.64-0.91)

1.10 (0.32-3.73)