Translating Behavior Change Principles Into a Blended Exercise Intervention for Older Adults: Design Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physical activity can prevent or delay age-related impairments and prolong the ability of older adults to live independently. Community-based programs typically offer classes where older adults can exercise only once a week under the guidance of an instructor. The health benefits of such programs vary. Exercise frequency and the duration of the program play a key role in realizing effectiveness. An auxiliary home-based exercise program can provide older adults the opportunity to exercise more regularly over a prolonged period of time in the convenience of their own homes. Furthermore, mobile electronic devices can be used to motivate and remotely guide older adults to exercise in a safe manner. Such a blended intervention, where technology is combined with personal guidance, needs to incorporate behavior change principles to ensure effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify theory-based components of a blended intervention that supports older adults to exercise at home. METHODS: The Medical Research Council framework was used to develop the blended intervention. Insights from focus group, expert panels, and literature were combined into leading design considerations. RESULTS: A client-server system had been developed that combined a tablet app with a database in the cloud and a Web-based dashboard that can be used by a personal coach to remotely monitor and guide older adults. The app contains several components that facilitate behavior change-an interactive module for goal setting, the ability to draw up a personal training schedule from a library containing over 50 exercise videos, progress monitoring, and possibilities to receive remote feedback and guidance of a personal coach. CONCLUSIONS: An evidence-based blended intervention was designed to promote physical activity among older adults. The underlying design choices were underpinned by behavior change techniques that are rooted in self-regulation. Key components of the tablet-supported intervention were a tailored program that accommodates individual needs, demonstrations of functional exercises, monitoring, and remote feedback. The blended approach combines the convenience of a home-based exercise program for older adults with the strengths of mobile health and personal guidance.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".