MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3120836840 · doi:10.2196/24689

Community-Based Physical Activity Interventions for Individuals with Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: Scoping Review Protocol

2021· article· en· W3120836840 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Enrico Quilico, Bonnie Swaine, Christophe Alarie, Angela Colantonio

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversité de MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersToronto Rehabilitation InstituteSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsTraumatic brain injuryPsychological interventionProtocol (science)PsychologyMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyClinical psychologyPsychiatryAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Long-term physical, cognitive, and psychosocial problems resulting from moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) can prevent individuals from returning to preinjury lifestyles because of significant challenges with employment, leisure, and relationships. While physical activity (PA) is proposed as a cost-effective method to alleviate problems after moderate to severe TBI, there is no review to date that synthesizes the evidence for PA in the community-based context. Further, although sex- and gender-based considerations in research are considered requisite to good science, there is no review on PA and TBI that has included this explicit focus. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review is to map and synthesize the current evidence identified through a systematic search of community-based PA interventions for individuals of all ages with moderate to severe TBI and provide an overview of that evidence by asking the following research questions: (1) what are the characteristics of community-based PA programs for individuals with moderate to severe TBI, (2) what are the reported health-related outcomes and measurement tools used to evaluate them, and (3) what considerations have been given to sex and/or gender? METHODS: Searches will be conducted of six academic databases for peer-reviewed articles. Two reviewers will independently screen the articles for inclusion and extract data for the analysis. The extracted data will be coded according to the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template checklist and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist to provide sufficient detail for replication. RESULTS: The abstract screening was completed by two reviewers and the extracted data were analyzed. A qualitative synthesis and description of community-based PA interventions for individuals with moderate to severe TBI will be provided. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review will generate new knowledge from published and publicly available literature. Dissemination of the results will include activities related to knowledge transfer for community-based PA after moderate to severe TBI for future research and practice. Evidence-based recommendations, future directions, potential limitations, use of online/digital components, and the possible need for a systematic review will be discussed as well. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/24689.

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)0.052
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0520.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.012
Bibliometrics0.0140.012
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0680.012

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 head0.585
GPT teacher head0.651
Teacher spread0.066 · 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
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→