Get Fit For Active Living: An 8-week Older Adult Exercise And Educational Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"Get Fit for Active Living" (GFAL) is an 8-week evidence-based physical activity education program developed for older adults by the Canadian Centre for Activity and Aging. This community-based program educates older adults about the importance of exercise and provides them with experience in developing an exercise routine, which in turn motivates them to continue their exercise. PURPOSE: To determine functional and physical fitness changes over the 8-week program. METHODS: 208 previously sedentary participants (mean age 70.6 ± 6 years; 138 females, 70 males) were recruited at five sites across Canada. Each week they attended two exercise sessions and one education session led by a GFAL trained facilitator. Pre- and post eight-week program measurements included the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB; timed measures of standing balance, walking speed, and ability to rise from a chair), self-paced 400-metre walk, and four components of The Seniors Fitness Test (arm curl, chair sit & reach, back scratch, 8-foot up & go). RESULTS: 173 participants (83%; mean age 70.4 ± 5 years; 112 females, 61 males) completed the 8-week program. All parameters (except upper body flexibility) showed significant improvement (p<0.010) post-intervention. Physical functioning as assessed by the SPPB increased from 10.99 ±1.1 to 11.51 ±0.89. Lower body strength (repeated chair stands time) decreased from 11.7 ±3.7 s to 10.0 ±2.8 s. 400-metre walk speed increased from 1.2 ±0.2 m/s to 1.3 ±0.2 m/s. Arm curls in 30 seconds increased from 15 ±4 to 18 ±5. Lower body flexibility significantly increased from 0.1 ± 9.0 cm to 2.6 ± 8 cm in the chair sit and reach test. Agility and dynamic balance (8-foot up & go) improved from 6.4 ±1.2 s to 5.9 ±1.0 s. Upper body flexibility as assessed by the back scratch test did not show significant improvement (-6.6 ±10.9 cm to -5.7 ±10.5 cm). CONCLUSIONS: This short-term community-based 8-week intervention was effective in increasing the functional and physical capacity of previously sedentary older adults. Six and 12 month follow-ups and an evaluation of booster sessions to maintain gains are planned.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".