MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3129720455 · doi:10.2196/27381

Technology-Based Fall Risk Assessments for Older Adults in Low-Income Settings: Protocol for a Cross-sectional Study

2021· article· en· W3129720455 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ladda Thiamwong, Jeffrey R. Stout, Xin Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of Central Florida
KeywordsMedicineFear of fallingCross-sectional studyBalance (ability)GerontologyOccupational safety and healthPhysical therapyBioelectrical impedance analysisPoison controlInjury preventionBody mass indexEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: One-third of older adults have maladaptive fall risk appraisal (FRA), a condition in which there is a discrepancy between the level of fear of falling (FOF) and physiological fall risk (balance performance). Older adults who overestimate their physiological fall risk and report a high FOF are less likely to participate in physical activity. Limited data suggest that the association among FOF, body composition, and physical activity intensity differs by fear severity. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine the associations among FRA, body composition, and physical activity using assistive health technology, including the BTrackS balance system, bioelectrical impedance analysis, and activity monitoring devices. This study also aims to examine the feasibility of recruitment and acceptability of technologies and procedures for use among older adults in low-income settings. METHODS: This cross-sectional study will be conducted in older adults' homes or apartments in low-income settings in Central Florida, United States. Following consent, participants will be contacted, and our team will visit them twice. The first visit includes questionnaire completion (eg, sociodemographic or FOF) and balance performance test using the BTrackS balance system. The participants will be stratified by the FRA matrix. In addition, they will perform hand grip strength and dynamic balance performance tests. Participants will then be asked to wear the ActiGraph GT9X Link wireless activity monitor on the nondominant wrist for 7 consecutive days. The second visit includes body composition testing and a structured interview about the acceptability of the technologies and procedures. RESULTS: Ethical approval was obtained from the institutional review board of the University of Central Florida (protocol number 2189; September 10, 2020). As of December 2020, participation enrollment is ongoing and the results are expected to be published in Summer 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate FRA is essential for implementing physical activity programs, especially in older adults with low income. This study will provide data for developing technology-based fall risk assessments to improve participation in physical activity, thus enhancing healthy longevity among older adults in low-income settings. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/27381.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.008

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.616
Teacher spread0.457 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→