A 16-week tai chi programme prevented falls in healthy older adultsCommentary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
R G Cumming Dr R G Cumming, Concord Hospital, Concord, New South Wales, Australia; bobc@health.usyd.edu.au Does a 16-week, community-based tai chi programme reduce falls in healthy older adults? ### Design: randomised controlled trial. ### Allocation: unclear. ### Blinding: unclear if blinded. ### Follow-up period: 24 weeks. ### Setting: community in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. ### Participants: 702 people ⩾60 years of age (mean age 69 y, 84% women) who lived in the community and had not practised tai chi in the previous year. Participants with degenerative neurological conditions, dementia, severely debilitating stroke, severe arthritis, marked vision impairment, or inability to walk across a room unaided were excluded. ### Intervention: a 16-week tai chi programme (n = 353) or a 24-week wait list (n = 349). The tai chi programme comprised weekly …
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".