MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093968332 · doi:10.1177/1357633x20964693

Response heterogeneity in a randomized controlled trial of telerehabilitation interventions among adults with multiple sclerosis

2020· article· en· W3093968332 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Plow, Robert W. Motl, Marcia Finlayson, François Béthoux

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Telemedicine and Telecare · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Multiple Sclerosis Society
KeywordsTelerehabilitationPsychosocialPsychological interventionPhysical therapyMedicineRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)ModerationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyTelemedicinePsychiatryHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Telerehabilitation may be effective on average but is not equally effective among all people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Thus, the purpose of this secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial was to explore whether baseline characteristics of participants with MS influence fatigue and physical activity outcomes of three telerehabilitation interventions. METHODS: Participants were randomized to contact-control intervention (CC), physical activity-only intervention (PA-only), and physical activity plus fatigue self-management intervention (FM+). The 12-week interventions were delivered over the phone. Sociodemographic (age and income), clinical (comorbidities, mental function and physical function), psychosocial (self-efficacy, outcome expectations and goal-setting), and behavioural baseline characteristics (step count and fatigue self-management behaviors) were used in a moderated regression analysis and a responder analysis to examine their influence on the Fatigue Impact Scale (FIS) and Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire (GLTEQ) at post-test (i.e. immediately post-interventions). RESULTS: < 0.05) between responders and non-responders. Specifically, non-responders on the FIS at post-test in the PA-only intervention had significantly lower baseline scores in goal setting for engaging in fatigue self-management behaviours. Also, non-responders on the GLTEQ at post-test in the FM+ intervention had significantly worse baseline scores in mental function. DISCUSSION: Further research is needed to understand the complex relationship among baseline characteristics, telerehabilitation and response heterogeneity. We discuss how research on examining response heterogeneity may be advanced by conducting mega-clinical trials, secondary analyses of big data, meta-analyses and employing non-traditional research designs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01572714).

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)0.091
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.130
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0910.130
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.013
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Telemedicine and TelecareSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207