MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2260854386 · doi:10.1177/0269215515623601

A randomized controlled trial to evaluate the feasibility of the Wii Fit for improving walking in older adults with lower limb amputation

2015· article· en· W2260854386 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Rehabilitation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyMedicineBlindingPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRehabilitationAmputationPsychologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of Wii.n.Walk for improving walking capacity in older adults with lower limb amputation. DESIGN: A parallel, evaluator-blind randomized controlled feasibility trial. SETTING: Community-living. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals who were ⩾50 years old with a unilateral lower limb amputation. INTERVENTION: Wii.n.Walk consisted of Wii Fit training, 3x/week (40 minute sessions), for 4 weeks. Training started in the clinic in groups of 3 and graduated to unsupervised home training. Control group were trained using cognitive games. MAIN MEASURES: Feasibility indicators: trial process (recruitment, retention, participants' perceived benefit from the Wii.n.Walk intervention measured by exit questionnaire), resources (adherence), management (participant processing, blinding), and treatment (adverse event, and Cohen's d effect size and variance). Primary clinical outcome: walking capacity measured using the 2 Minute Walk Test at baseline, end of treatment, and 3-week retention. RESULTS: Of 28 randomized participants, 24 completed the trial (12/arm). Median (range) age was 62.0 (50-78) years. Mean (SD) score for perceived benefit from the Wii.n.Walk intervention was 38.9/45 (6.8). Adherence was 83.4%. The effect sizes for the 2 Minute Walk Test were 0.5 (end of treatment) and 0.6 (3-week retention) based on intention to treat with imputed data; and 0.9 (end of treatment) and 1.2 (3-week retention) based on per protocol analysis. The required sample size for a future larger RCT was deemed to be 72 (36 per arm). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggested the feasibility of the Wii.n.Walk with a medium effect size for improving walking capacity. Future larger randomized controlled trials investigating efficacy are warranted.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.314 · 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