The Home-Based Older People's Exercise (HOPE) trial: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Frailty is common in older age, and is associated with important adverse health outcomes including increased risk of disability and admission to hospital or long-term care. Exercise interventions for frail older people have the potential to reduce the risk of these adverse outcomes by increasing muscle strength and improving mobility. METHODS/DESIGN: The Home-Based Older People's Exercise (HOPE) trial is a two arm, assessor blind pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) to assess the effectiveness of a 12 week exercise intervention (the HOPE programme) designed to improve the mobility and functional abilities of frail older people living at home, compared with usual care. The primary outcome is the timed-up-and-go test (TUGT), measured at baseline and 14 weeks post-randomisation. Secondary outcomes include the Barthel Index of activities of daily living (ADL), EuroQol Group 5-Dimension Self-Report Questionnaire (EQ-5D) quality of life measure and the geriatric depression scale (GDS), measured at baseline and 14 weeks post-randomisation. We will record baseline frailty using the Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS), record falls and document muscle/joint pain. We will test the feasibility of collection of data to identify therapy resources required for delivery of the intervention. DISCUSSION: The HOPE trial will explore and evaluate a home-based exercise intervention for frail older people. Although previous RCTs have used operationalised, non-validated methods of measuring frailty, the HOPE trial is, to our knowledge, the first RCT of an exercise intervention for frail older people that includes a validated method of frailty assessment at baseline. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: ISRCTN57066881.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".