MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2773862085 · doi:10.1089/g4h.2017.0065

Effects of Kinect Adventures Games Versus Conventional Physical Therapy on Postural Control in Elderly People: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2017· article· en· W2773862085 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGames for Health Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidade de São Paulo
KeywordsCardiorespiratory fitnessPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialGaitMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychological interventionAnalysis of varianceCognitionPost-hoc analysisTest (biology)RehabilitationPsychologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of Kinect Adventures games versus conventional physiotherapy to improve postural control (PC), gait, cardiorespiratory fitness, and cognition of the elderly. In addition, we evaluated the safety, acceptability, and adherence to the interventions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was a randomized clinical trial in which 46 elderly individuals were selected, mean age 69.3 (5.34) years. Participants were allocated to the Kinect Adventures Training Group (KATG) or the Conventional Physical Therapy Group (CPTG), 23 individuals in each group. Participants of both groups participated in 14 training sessions lasting 1 hour each, twice a week. The KATG practiced four Kinect Adventures games. The CPTG participated in conventional physiotherapy. The primary outcome was PC: Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Mini-BESTest), and secondary outcomes were gait: Functional Gait Assessment (FGA), cardiorespiratory fitness: Six-minute step test (6MST), and cognition: Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Acceptability was assessed through a questionnaire created by the researchers themselves. Adherence was assessed by the "frequency of the number of elderly individuals who completed the interventions and safety through the presence of adverse effects." Participants were assessed immediately pre- and posttreatment and fourth week after the end of the treatment. Statistical analysis was done through repeated-measures analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc test. RESULTS: Both groups presented a significant improvement in the PC (Mini-BEST), gait (FGA), and cognition (MoCA) posttreatment that was maintained at fourth week after treatment (post hoc Tukey test; P < 0.05). Regarding cardiorespiratory fitness (6MST), the KATG presented improvement posttreatment and maintenance of the results in the fourth week after treatment. CPTG showed improvement only in fourth week after treatment (post hoc Tukey tests; P < 0.05). Regarding the acceptability, the questionnaire showed that both groups were satisfied with regard to the proposed interventions. There was 91% adherence in both training sessions. Regarding the safety, 34% and 26% of the individuals of the KATG and CPTG, respectively, presented adverse effects of delayed muscle pain in the lower limbs after the first session only. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences between the KATG and CPTG; both interventions provided positive effects on PC, gait, cardiorespiratory fitness, and cognition of the elderly.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.845

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.377 · 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