The D index represents an estimate of Sirtuin inhibitor the log hazard ratio comparing two equal-sized groups overcoming the generality issues associated

with comparing hazard ratios across different study samples (Royston and Sauerbrei 2004). The proportion of variation explained (R2) provides a measure of the fit of the classification system to the observed data (Royston and Sauerbrei 2004). The larger is the separation (D), the greater is the discrimination between levels of falls risk between item and total score categories (Royston et al 2004). Robust estimates of the standard errors were used to incorporate the correlation of observations within individuals (Twisk et al 2005). The proportional hazards assumption of each survival model was tested with the scaled Schoenfield residuals tests (Machin et al 2006). Methods for calculating sample size and power

estimates for epidemiological modeling studies that use recurrent events survival models to investigate associations between predictors and INCB024360 molecular weight outcome events are not readily available. As such, a pragmatic sample size was selected that was considered appropriate to determine meaningful associations and that would provide a representative sample of people living in residential aged care. Of the 298 residents living in the six facilities, 100 were excluded from the study because they had been living at the facility for less than 12 months. Of the 198 residents who were eligible to participate in the study, 87 agreed to participate, as presented in Figure 1. The demographic and health characteristics of the residents who participated in the study are presented in Table 1. No participants withdrew from the study and no adverse events attributable to the study assessments were reported. Table 1 also presents the percentage of residents in each Physical Mobility Scale category at the baseline assessment. The category below with the greatest number of participants

(37%) was the ‘highest independence’ mobility category (Physical Mobility Scale total score 37–45). Mobility impairment as measured by the Physical Mobility Scale total score had a non-linear association with risk of falling (Figure 2). Residents with mild impairment (Physical Mobility Scale total score 28–36) had the highest risk for falling, which was statistically significant when compared to residents in all other score categories (hazard ratio = 1.98, 95% CI 1.30 to 3.03). Residents in the fully dependent mobility category (Physical Mobility Scale total score 0 to 9) had the lowest risk category for falls, which was also statistically significant when compared to residents in all other score categories (hazard ratio = 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.32). Associations between individual item scores on the Physical Mobility Scale and falls risk are presented in detail in Figure 3.