MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080122366 · doi:10.1016/j.cct.2020.106124

DO-HEALTH: Vitamin D3 - Omega-3 - Home exercise - Healthy aging and longevity trial - Design of a multinational clinical trial on healthy aging among European seniors

2020· article· en· W3080122366 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Heike A. Bischoff‐Ferrari, Caroline de Godoi Rezende Costa Molino, Sandrine Rival, Bruno Vellas, René Rizzoli, Reto W. Kressig, John А. Kanis, JoAnn E. Manson, Bess Dawson‐Hughes, E. John Orav, José António Pereira da Silva, Michael Blauth, Dieter Felsenberg, Stephen M. Ferrari, Robert Theiler

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary Clinical Trials · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNestecUniversität ZürichEuropean CommissionPfizer
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyGerontologyClinical trialInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DO-HEALTH is a multi-center clinical trial among 2157 community-dwelling European men and women age 70 and older. The 2x2x2 randomized-control factorial design trial tested the individual and additive benefit, as well as the cost-effectiveness, of 3 interventions: vitamin D 2000 IU/day, omega-3 fatty acids 1000 mg/day (EPA + DHA, ratio 1:2), and a 30-minute 3 times/week home exercise (strength versus flexibility). Each treatment tested has shown considerable prior promise from mechanistic studies, small clinical trials, or large cohort studies, in the prevention of common age-related chronic diseases, but definitive data are missing. DO-HEALTH will test these interventions in relation to 6 primary endpoints (systolic and diastolic blood pressure, non-vertebral fractures, Short Physical Performance Battery score, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and risk of infections), plus several secondary endpoints explored in ancillary studies (i.e. rate of any falls and injurious falls, joint pain, oral health, quality of life, and incident frailty). As the 3 interventions have distinct mechanisms of action for each of the 6 primary endpoints, a maximum benefit is expected for their additive benefit as a "multi-modal" intervention. The trial duration is 3 years with in-person contacts with all participants at 4 clinical visits and by quarterly phone calls. Baseline and follow-up blood samples were collected in all participants to measure changes in 25-hydroxyvitamin D and poly-unsaturated fatty acid concentrations. Our objective was to test interventions that are expected to promote healthy aging and longer life expectancy and that can be easily and safely implemented by older community-dwelling adults.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.528
GPT teacher head0.531
Teacher spread0.003 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations54
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContemporary Clinical TrialsSame topicVitamin D Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207