Design and Rationale for the Deep South Interactive Voice Response System–Supported Active Lifestyle Study: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The rates of physical inactivity and related cancer incidence and mortality are disproportionately high in the Deep South region in the United States, a rural, medically underserved region with a large African American population compared with the rest of the nation. Given this region's lower rates of literacy and internet access, interactive voice response (IVR) system-automated telephone-based interventions have the potential to help overcome physical activity intervention barriers (literacy, internet access, costs, and transportation) but have yet to be extended to rural, underserved populations, such as in the Deep South. Thus, extensive formative research is being conducted to develop and beta test the Deep South IVR System-Supported Active Lifestyle intervention in preparation for dissemination in rural Alabama counties. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to describe the design and rationale of an ongoing efficacy trial of the Deep South IVR System-Supported Active Lifestyle intervention. METHODS: A two-arm randomized controlled trial will be conducted to compare a 12-month physical activity intervention versus a wait-list control condition in 240 underactive adults from 6 rural Alabama counties. The Deep South IVR System-Supported Active Lifestyle intervention is based on the Social Cognitive Theory and includes IVR-automated physical activity-related phone counseling (daily in months 0-3, twice weekly in months 4-6, and weekly in months 7-12) and support from local rural county coordinators with the University of Alabama O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center Community Outreach and Engagement Office. The primary outcome is weekly minutes of moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity (7-day physical activity recall; accelerometry) at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, and 18 months. Rural Active Living Assessments will be conducted in each rural county to assess walkability, assess recreational amenities, and inform future environment and policy efforts. RESULTS: This study was funded in March 2019 and approved by the institutional review board of the University of Alabama at Birmingham in April 2019. As of February 2020, start-up activities (hiring and training staff and purchasing supplies) were completed. Study recruitment and assessments began in September 2020 and are ongoing. As of February 2021, a total of 43 participants have been enrolled in Dallas County, 42 in Sumter County, and 51 in Greene County. CONCLUSIONS: IVR-supported phone counseling has great potential for addressing physical activity barriers (eg, culture, literacy, cost, or transportation) and reducing related rural health disparities in this region. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03903874; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03903874. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/29245.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | high |
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 | 0.066 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.116 | 0.025 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".