MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3049435566 · doi:10.2196/18929

The Active Brains Digital Intervention to Reduce Cognitive Decline in Older Adults: Protocol for a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial

2020· article· en· W3049435566 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kirsten A. Smith, Katherine Bradbury, Rosie Essery, Sebastien Pollet, Fiona Mowbray, Joanna Slodkowska‐Barabasz, James Denison‐Day, Victoria Hayter, Jo Kelly, Jane Somerville, Jin Zhang, Elisabeth Grey, Max J. Western, Anne Ferrey, Adele Krusche, Beth Stuart, Nanette Mutrie, Siân Robinson, Guiqing Yao, Gareth Griffiths, Louise Robinson, Martin N. Rossor, John Gallacher, Simon J. Griffin, Tony Kendrick, Shanaya Rathod, Bernard Gudgin, Rosemary Phillips, Tom Stokes, John Niven, Paul Little, Lucy Yardley

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersProgramme Grants for Applied ResearchNational Institute for Health Research Southampton Biomedical Research CentreDepartment of Health and Social CareMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialCognitive declineIntervention (counseling)DementiaMedicineCognitionQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyPhysical therapyPsychologyPsychiatryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Increasing physical activity, improving diet, and performing brain training exercises are associated with reduced cognitive decline in older adults. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we describe a feasibility trial of the Active Brains intervention, a web-based digital intervention developed to support older adults to make these 3 healthy behavior changes associated with improved cognitive health. The Active Brains trial is a randomized feasibility trial that will test how accessible, acceptable, and feasible the Active Brains intervention is and the effectiveness of the study procedures that we intend to use in the larger, main trial. METHODS: In the randomized controlled trial (RCT), we use a parallel design. We will be conducting the intervention with 2 populations recruited through GP practices (family practices) in England from 2018 to 2019: older adults with signs of cognitive decline and older adults without any cognitive decline. Trial participants were randomly allocated to 1 of 3 study groups: usual care, the Active Brains intervention, or the Active Brains website plus brief support from a trained coach (over the phone or by email). The main outcomes are performance on cognitive tasks, quality of life (using EuroQol-5D 5 level), Instrumental Activities of Daily Living, and diagnoses of dementia. Secondary outcomes (including depression, enablement, and health care costs) and process measures (including qualitative interviews with participants and supporters) will also be collected. The trial has been approved by the National Health Service Research Ethics Committee (reference 17/SC/0463). RESULTS: Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences, and shared at public engagement events. Data collection was completed in May 2020, and the results will be reported in 2021. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study will help us to identify and make important changes to the website, the support received, or the study procedures before we progress to our main randomized phase III trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number 23758980; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN23758980. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/18929.

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)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.006
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0080.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0940.015

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.567
Teacher spread0.416 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→