MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Square-stepping Exercise For Older Adults With Chronic Disease To Improve Cognition and Mobility

2018· article· en· W2806979846 on OpenAlexaffabout
Erin M. Shellington, Dawn P. Gill, Sonja M. Reichert, Matthew Heath, Robert J. Petrella

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaMoodCognitionMedicineCognitive declinePhysical therapyPreferred walking speedPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyDiseaseInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Square-stepping exercise (SSE) is a visuospatial working memory task with a cued stepping response that improves mobility and cognition in older adults. PURPOSE: To determine if a SSE intervention improves cognitive and mobility in older adults with chronic disease (i.e., knee osteoarthritis [KOA]; type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM] with self-reported cognitive complaints [sCC]; and dementia), compared to control groups. METHODS: We conducted three pilot randomized controlled trials, with 12- and 24-week intervention periods, compared to wait-list control groups. Assessments focused on: mobility (i.e., 30-second chair stand, and walking speed) for adults with KOA; cognition [i.e., Cambridge Brain Sciences, antisaccade reaction time (RT)] for adults with T2DM with sCC; and mood and behaviours questionnaire (i.e., Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire; NPIQ) for adults with dementia. RESULTS: KOA participants showed trends toward improved 30-second chair stand at 12-weeks (F=1.8, p=0.12, ηp2=0.16) and 24-weeks (F=3.4, p=0.09, ηp2=0.18), and walking speed at 24-weeks (F=2.4, p=0.14, ηp2=0.14), compared to controls after adjusting for baseline. T2DM with sCC improved on planning change scores from 12 to 24-weeks (F=5.8, p=0.03, ηp2=0.28) compared to controls, and a non-significant improvement in antisaccade RT of 38 ms (SD 16). Adults with dementia improved on NPIQ scores (i.e. symptoms) at 12-weeks (total: F=7.3, p=0.01, ηp2=0.25; frequency: F=9.4, p=0.01, ηp2=0.30; and severity: F=7.0, p=0.02, ηp2=0.24), compared to controls. CONCLUSIONS: In our pilot trials, SSE showed promise for improving mobility and cognition in adults with chronic disease and demonstrates the potential for its use in adults with diverse mobility and cognitive impairments. Funding: Supported by the Department of Family Medicine, University of Western Ontario, Mitacs Accelerate, Ontario Graduate Scholarship, and Schlegel - University of Waterloo Research Institute for Aging.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery→French-language works237,207→