MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890925676 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igy022

Randomized Controlled Trial of Exercise to Improve Walking Energetics in Older Adults

2018· article· en· W2890925676 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSimon Fraser University
FundersVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsPhysical therapyAerobic exerciseRelaxation (psychology)Physical medicine and rehabilitationRandomized controlled trialTreadmillPreferred walking speedMedicinePsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobility limitation is common and has been linked to high energetic requirements of daily activities, including walking. The study objective was to determine whether two separate forms of exercise could reduce the energy cost of walking and secondary outcomes related to activity and participation domains among older adults with mobility limitation. Community-dwelling older adults with self-reported mobility limitation (n = 72) were randomized to 12 weeks of twice-weekly, group-based, instructor-led timing and coordination, aerobic walking, or stretching and relaxation (active control) programs. The primary outcome was the energy cost of walking (mL O2/kg/m), assessed by a 5-minute treadmill walking test (0.8 m/s). Secondary outcomes were fatigability, physical activity, endurance, physical function, and life-space. Baseline-adjusted ANCOVAs were used to determine mean differences between exercise and control groups at 12 and 24 weeks. Exercise session attendance was high: 86% for timing and coordination, 81% for aerobic walking, and 90% for stretching and relaxation. At 12 weeks, timing and coordination reduced the mean energy cost of walking by 15% versus stretching and relaxation (p = .008). Among those with high baseline cost, timing and coordination reduced mean energy cost by 20% versus stretching and relaxation (p = .055). Reductions were sustained at 24 weeks. Aerobic walking had no effect on the energy cost of walking at 12 or 24 weeks. At 12 weeks, there was a trend toward faster gait speed (by 0.1 m/s) in timing and coordination versus stretching and relaxation (p = .074). Fatigability, physical activity, endurance, physical function, and life-space did not change with timing and coordination or aerobic walking versus stretching and relaxation at 12 or 24 weeks. Twelve weeks of timing and coordination, but not aerobic walking, reduced the energy cost of walking among older adults with mobility limitation, particularly among those with high baseline energy cost; reductions in energy cost were sustained following training cessation. Timing and coordination also led to a trend toward faster gait speed.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.333 · 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