A web‐based tailored nursing intervention (TAVIE en m@rche) aimed at increasing walking after an acute coronary syndrome: Multicentre randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Evaluate a web-based tailored nursing intervention, TAVIE en m@rche, on increasing daily steps after an acute coronary syndrome. DESIGN: Parallel two-group multicentre randomized trial. METHODS: An experimental group receiving TAVIE en m@rche, was compared to a control group receiving hyperlinks to public websites. Acute coronary syndrome patients who were insufficiently active were recruited from three coronary care units. Daily steps at 12 weeks were the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included self-reported walking and moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Exploratory outcomes were angina frequency, emergency department visits, hospitalizations and secondary prevention programme attendance. RESULTS: Primary data were analysed for 39 participants. No significant effects were found. At 12 weeks 275.9 more daily steps and 1,464.3 more energy expenditure in MVPA were found in the experimental group relative to the control. No effects were found for angina frequency, emergency department visits, hospitalizations and secondary prevention programme attendance. CONCLUSION: The lack of effect on our primary result may be explained by the intervention goal that was mismatched to the needs of our mostly sufficiently active sample at randomization, resulting in no meaningful change in daily steps. Although the non-significantly greater increase in self-reported MVPA may represent gains in health among the participants that accessed TAVIE en m@rche, this result should be interpreted with caution. IMPACT: From 40%-60% of acute coronary syndrome patients self-report insufficient levels of physical activity. No effect was found on the primary outcome of daily steps. Although not significant, a greater increase in MVPA was found at 12 weeks. The primary outcome can be explained by most of the sample having attained the physical activity recommendation at randomization. Caution in interpreting the non-significant increase in MVPA is warranted due to attrition bias and statistical uncertainty. Future directions may consider the timing of randomization in relation to meeting the needs of insufficiently active acute coronary syndrome patients.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".