MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3113587174 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039723

Double-task exercise programmes to strengthen cognitive and vascular health in older adults at risk of cognitive decline: protocol for a randomised clinical trial

2020· article· en· W3113587174 on OpenAlexaff
Rosalinda Sánchez‐Arenas, Svetlana V. Doubova, Mariela Bernabé-García, Michel A Gregory, Laura Alejandra Mejía-Alonso, Óscar Orihuela-Rodríguez, Carlos Paredes-Manjarréz, Tania Colin‐Martínez, Irene Mujica-Morales, Israel Grijalva, Lourdes Basurto-Acevedo, Leticia Manuel‐Apolinar, Juan Cuadros‐Moreno, Arcelia Bernal-Diaz, Ryosuke Shigematsu

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCognitionCognitive declineClinical trialRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyPsychological interventionQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyDiseasePsychiatryNursingDementia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Cognitive and physical declines are frequent causes of disability among older adults (OAs) in Mexico that imposes significant burden on the health system and OAs' families. Programmes to prevent or delay OAs' cognitive and physical decline are scarce. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A double-blind randomised clinical trial will be conducted. The study will aim to evaluate two 24-week double-task (aerobic and cognitive) square-stepping exercise programmes for OAs at risk of cognitive decline-one programme with and another without caregiver participation-and to compare these with an aerobic-balance-stretching exercise programme (control group). 300 OAs (100 per group) affiliated with the Mexican Institute of Social Security (IMSS) between 60 and 65 years of age with self-reported cognitive concerns will participate. They will be stratified by education level and randomly allocated to the groups. The intervention will last 24 weeks, and the effect of each programme will be evaluated 12, 24 and 52 weeks after the intervention. Participants' demographic and clinical characteristics will be collected at baseline. The outcomes will include: (1) general cognitive function; (2) specific cognitive functions; (3) dual-task gait; (4) blood pressure; (5) carotid intima-media thickness; (6) OAs' health-related quality of life; and (7) caregiver burden. The effects of the interventions on each outcome variable will be examined using a repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), with study groups as the between-subjects variable and time as the within-subject variable. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the IMSS Ethics and Research Committees (registration number: 2018-785-095). All participants will sign a consent form prior to their participation. The study results will be disseminated to the IMSS authorities, healthcare providers and the research community. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04068376).

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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 score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.007
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0100.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0730.015

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→