MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971334212 · doi:10.7224/1537-2073.2014-061

International MS Falls Prevention Research Network

2014· article· en· W1971334212 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jacob J. Sosnoff, Marcia Finlayson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of MS Care · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsGeneral partnershipMedicineGerontologyLibrary scienceFamily medicinePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a given year, nearly 60% of individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS) will experience a fall. A significant portion of these falls will result in an injury, ranging from mild bruising to bone fractures. Perhaps more insidious than any physical injuries are the reduced activity, fear of falling, and social isolation to which falls may contribute. Falls and their consequences are important targets of rehabilitation. Yet, despite the work of several individual research teams around the world, scientific knowledge about effective ways to reduce the number, severity, and consequences of falls experienced by people with MS is in its infancy. Overcoming this problem will require international collaboration and partnership that pools interdisciplinary expertise and produces evidence about the best approaches to reduce fall frequency, severity, and consequences for people with MS.In order to facilitate this collaboration and partnership, a group of seven MS researchers secured a planning grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research to support an inaugural meeting of the International MS Falls Prevention Research Network (IMSFPRN). Our grant team includes Principal Investigator Marcia Finlayson (Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada) and Co-Investigators (in alphabetical order) Michelle Cameron (Department of Neurology, Oregon Health & Science University, and Portland VA Medical Center, Portland, OR, USA), Davide Cattaneo (Don C. Gnocchi Foundation, Milan, Italy), Susan Coote (University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland), Patricia N. Matsuda (University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA), Elizabeth Peterson (University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA), and Jacob J. Sosnoff (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA).The founding members of the IMSFPRN, and those who may join in the future, will work collaboratively to develop and implement multisite research protocols to advance knowledge on falls and falls prevention among people with MS. The overarching goals of the initial meeting were as follows: 1) to build collaborative partnerships among researchers, clinicians, consumers, and other key stakeholders committed to strengthening evidence for MS falls prevention, and 2) to begin work on a protocol for an MS falls-prevention intervention trial. The long-term goal of the IMSFPRN is to develop and disseminate clinically relevant knowledge that will reduce the frequency, severity, and functional consequences of falls experienced by people with MS worldwide.The inaugural meeting was held at Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario, Canada, in March 2014. In addition to the IMSFPRN founding members, the meeting was attended by clinicians from a variety of fields (neurology, physical therapy, occupational therapy, nursing, kinesiology); experts in aging with MS, physical activity and disability, and postural control in older adults; individuals living with MS; and representatives from the Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists, the Canadian Physiotherapy Association, and the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada. Through-out the meeting, all participants had opportunities and were encouraged to share their ideas and expertise regarding the key elements of the falls-prevention intervention protocol that the IMSFPRN is developing. These opportunities were made possible through presentations, small- and large-group discussions, and formal nominal group methods.This theme issue of the International Journal of MS Care focuses on the recommendations concerning falls prevention that emerged from the March 2014 meeting of the IMSFPRN. An article by Ploughman et al. focuses on how research on postural control of older adults, physical activity promotion for people with spinal cord injury, and aging with MS can and should inform falls-prevention research in MS. Cameron et al. detail which people with MS should be targeted for falls-prevention trials. Gunn and colleagues discuss the advantages and disadvantages of various settings for falls-prevention trials that can be implemented for people with MS. Other articles provide the rationale and potential measurement tools for the three key outcomes the meeting participants identified for an MS falls-prevention intervention: number of falls (Coote et al.), dynamic balance (Cattaneo et al.), and participation (Finlayson et al.). Finally, Finlayson et al. examine how the RE-AIM framework can inform the ongoing work of the IMSFPRN in order to maximize the uptake of the evidence we plan to produce in the years to come.There is little doubt that determining best practices in falls prevention specific to people with MS is essential. This theme issue outlines an international effort to lay the foundation for falls-prevention research. As members of the IMSFPRN, our goal is to work together to maximize falls-prevention research efforts. We hope that this theme issue will encourage others to join our group in our effort to reduce the frequency, severity, and functional consequences of falls in people with MS. If you are interested in joining the Network or being kept abreast of our activities, please contact Marcia Finlayson at marcia.finlayson@queensu.ca.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1050.043

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.348 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of MS CareSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207