Multi-Component Exercise with High-Intensity, Free-Weight, Functional Resistance Training in Pre-Frail Females: A Quasi-Experimental, Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: No study has performed an exercise intervention that included high-intensity, free-weight, functional resistance training, and assessed frailty status as an inclusion criteria and outcome measure via original, standardized tools, in pre-frail females. OBJECTIVES: Determine if the intervention strategy is not only feasible and safe, but can also improve frailty status, functional task performance, and muscle strength. DESIGN: Pilot, quasi-experimental. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: 20 older-adults with pre-frailty characteristics. INTERVENTION: 12-weeks (3 days/week, 45-60 minutes/session) of multi-component exercise, inclusive of aerobic, resistance, balance and flexibility exercises. The crux of the program was balance and resistance exercises, the latter utilized high-intensity, free-weight, functional resistance training. The control group maintained their usual care. MEASUREMENTS: 1) Feasibility and safety (dropout, adherence, and adverse event); 2) Frailty (Frailty Phenotype, Clinical Frailty Scale, and gait speed); 3) Functional task performance (grip strength and sit-to-stand time); and 4) Isometric and isotonic strength of the knee extensors and elbow flexors. RESULTS: No participants dropped out of the intervention or experienced an adverse event, and adherence averaged 88.3%. The exercise group became less frail, whereas the control group became more frail. There was a significant within-group improvement in exercise participants gait speed (p ≤ 0.01, +0.24 m/sec), grip strength (p ≤ 0.01, +3.9 kg), and sit-to-stand time (p ≤ 0.01, -5.0 sec). There was a significant within-group improvement in exercise participants knee extension isometric torque (p ≤ 0.05, +7.4 Nm) and isotonic velocity (p = ≤ 0.01, +37.5 ˚/sec). Elbow flexion isotonic velocity significantly declined within the control group (p ≤ 0.01, -20.2 ˚/sec) and demonstrated a significant between-group difference (p ≤ 0.05, 40.73 ˚/sec) post-intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention strategy appears to be feasible and safe, and may also improve frailty status, functional task performance, and muscle strength. These results help calculate effect size for a future randomized controlled trial.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".