Enhancing Physical and Psychosocial Health of Older Adults in Saudi Arabia through Walking: Comparison between Supervised Group-Based and Non-Supervised Individual-Based Walking
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Walking is widely recognized as one of the most common and effective forms of physical activity, particularly for older adults. This study examined the comparative effects of two types of walking interventions, including supervised group-based intervention (SGBI) and non-supervised individual-based intervention (NSIBI), on frailty syndrome, cognitive functions or skills, and health-related quality of life among sedentary older Saudi individuals. A 15-week double-blinded, randomized controlled trial (RCT) including three groups (two were intervention groups while the other was the control group) was conducted among older adults who were inactive to examine the effect of different forms of walking interventions on frailty syndrome, cognitive functions, and health-related quality of life. A total of 107 participants, including 65 males and 42 females, were divided into three groups, which include SGBI, NSIBI, and the control group. Frailty syndrome was measured using the physical performance test (PPT), while cognitive function and health-related quality of life were assessed using the Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Short Form 36 (SF 36) health survey questionnaire. One-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) and one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with the pre- and post-tests were performed for within- and between-group differences. while post-test data for the control group participants were absent due to the change in elderly center regulation, and they were excluded from the analysis. Hence, the comparison was stated only between the intervention groups. Both of the intervention groups (SGBI and NSIBI) showed significant within-subject differences in the Physical Function subscale of the health-related quality of life scale only, with F(1,20) = 23.03, p < 0.001, and F(1,18) = 27.22, p < 0.001, respectively. On the other hand, the Physical Performance Test revealed significant [F(2,51) = 9.21, p < 0.001] between-group differences in the post-test based on the baseline values. In addition, the average step count of older adults was increased from 4000 steps per session to around 7000 steps per session in the intervention group. The average heart rate of the NSIBI group did not show a visible change, and the resting heart rate of both groups showed a slightly declining trend throughout the intervention period. The walking intervention significantly increased participants’ physical function, which is a component of health-related quality of life and physical performance (frailty level), along with average daily step counts for older adults in Saudi Arabia. Regular engagement in the recommended level of walking is strongly advisable for Saudi Arabian older adults to maintain their overall quality of life at this stage.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».