MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3190526375 · doi:10.3390/ijerph18168374

Pickleball for Inactive Mid-Life and Older Adults in Rural Utah: A Feasibility Study

2021· article· en· W3190526375 on OpenAlexaff
Paige Wray, Callahan K. Ward, Cindy Nelson, Sandra H. Sulzer, Christopher J. Dakin, Brennan J. Thompson, Matthew Vierimaa, Debasree Das Gupta, David A. E. Bolton

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
FundersUtah State University
KeywordsPsychosocialCognitionGerontologyIntervention (counseling)MedicineLife satisfactionMental healthPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many diseases, disabilities, and mental health conditions associated with aging can be delayed or prevented through regular exercise. Several barriers to exercise, many of which are exacerbated in rural communities, prevent mid-life and older adults from accessing its benefits. However, recently, a racquet sport named pickleball has become popular among older adults, and it appears to overcome some of these barriers. We conducted a feasibility study to evaluate the impact of a six-week pickleball intervention on measures of muscle function, cognitive function, perceived pain, and cardio-metabolic risk, as well as several psychosocial factors contributing to adherence in sedentary rural participants. Participants improved their vertical jump, cognitive performance, and reported a decrease in self-reported pain, suggesting improved physical and cognitive health across the sample. Participants also reported high levels of satisfaction and demonstrated good adherence over the duration of the study. Perhaps of greatest value was the overwhelmingly positive response from participants to the intervention and follow-up interviews reporting a desire to continue pickleball play beyond the study period. Overall, pickleball appears to be a promising intervention to, (1) elicit functional- and cognitive-related improvements, and (2) motivate mid-life and older adults to adhere to exercise sufficiently long to benefit their health.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations41
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207