Müller A, Kob R, Freiberger E, Rohleder N, Britting S (2026)
Publication Type: Journal article
Publication year: 2026
Book Volume: 26
Article Number: 1090
Journal Issue: 1
DOI: 10.1186/s12877-026-08166-3
Background: Concerns about falling (CaF) are commonly assessed using the Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I), but telephone versus face-to-face interviews may influence responses. The objective of this secondary paired method-comparison analysis was to assess agreement between telephone and face-to-face FES-I total scores in older adults and to explore whether the two administration modes differed at the total-score and item levels. Methods: Data were drawn from the FEARFALL study, a longitudinal randomized controlled trial on stress and functional health in older adults with CaF. FES-I scores of 123 participants aged 70 years and older were collected via both telephone and face-to-face interviews. Differences in total scores, item-level differences, and regression models were analyzed to identify potential influencing factors. Results: FES-I scores obtained during the telephone-first assessment were lower than those obtained at the subsequent face-to-face assessment (p <.001; d = -0.34). Agreement between the two modes was moderate to good (ICC = 0.67). In addition, the two assessment modes showed a high correlation (r =.71) with heterogeneity at the item level. Three items showed significant deviations (Item 4: “bathing/showering”, p
APA:
Müller, A., Kob, R., Freiberger, E., Rohleder, N., & Britting, S. (2026). Assessing concerns about falling: a comparison of telephone-based and face-to-face FES-I interviews in older adults. BMC Geriatrics, 26(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-026-08166-3
MLA:
Müller, Anja, et al. "Assessing concerns about falling: a comparison of telephone-based and face-to-face FES-I interviews in older adults." BMC Geriatrics 26.1 (2026).
BibTeX: Download