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)