Feasibility of an Internet-Based Intervention to Promote Exercise for People With Spinal Cord Injury: Observational Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: People with spinal cord injury (SCI) are less likely to be physically active and have higher chronic disease risk than those in the general population due to physical and metabolic changes that occur postinjury. Few studies have investigated approaches to promote increased physical activity (PA) for people with SCI despite evidence that they face unique barriers, including lack of accessible transportation and exercise equipment. To address these obstacles, we adapted an evidence-based phone-delivered intervention that promoted increased PA among people with SCI into a web-based platform, titled the Workout on Wheels internet intervention (WOWii). The adapted program provides participants with weekly skill-building information and activities, basic exercise equipment, and ongoing support through weekly group videoconferencing. OBJECTIVE: This pilot study was conducted to assess the feasibility of using a web-based and virtual format to deliver the WOWii program in a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: We assessed the feasibility of the web-based program by delivering an abbreviated, 4-week version to 10 participants with SCI. Rates of weekly videoconference attendance, activity completion, and exercise activity as tracked by an arm-based activity monitor were recorded for all participants. RESULTS: Participants averaged 3.3 of 4 (83%) weekly group videoconferences attended, 3.4 of 4 (85%) web-based module activities completed, and 2.3 of 4 (58%) weeks of using the arm-based activity monitor. The majority of the sample (9/10, 90%) synced their arm-based PA monitor at least once, and overall engagement as an average of each component across the 4 weeks was 75%. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention had sufficiently high levels of engagement to be used in a full randomized controlled trial to test its effectiveness in improving levels of PA among people with SCI. The knowledge we gained from this pilot study informed improvements that were made in the full randomized controlled trial.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".