Group-based telerehabilitation intervention using Wii Fit to improve walking in older adults with lower limb amputation (WiiNWalk): A randomized control trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Determine efficacy of the novel WiiNWalk intervention on walking-related outcomes in older adults with lower limb amputation. DESIGN: Multi-site, parallel, evaluator-masked randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Home-setting in three Canadian cities. PARTICIPANTS: Community-dwelling lower limb prosthesis users over 50 years of age. INTERVENTIONS: The WiiNWalk group (n = 38) used modified Wii Fit activities for prosthetic rehabilitation. The attention control group (n = 33) used Big Brain Academy: Wii Degree, comprising of cognitive activities. Both groups completed a 4-week supervised phase with three 1-h sessions/week in groups of three overseen by a clinician via videoconferencing and a 4-week unstructured and unsupervised phase. MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcome was walking capacity (2 min walk test); secondary outcomes were balance confidence (activities-specific balance confidence scale), dynamic balance (four-step square test), and lower limb functioning (short physical performance battery). Outcomes were compared across time points with repeated measures analysis of covariance, adjusting for baseline and age. RESULTS: Mean age was 65.0 (8.4) years, with 179.5 (223.5) months post-amputation and 80% transtibial amputation. No group difference in a 2 min walk test with an effect size: 1.53 95% CI [-3.17, 6.23] m. Activities balance confidence was greater in the WiiNWalk group by 5.53 [2.53, 8.52]%. No group difference in the four-step square test -0.16 [-1.25, 0.92] s, nor short physical performance battery 0.48 [-0.65, 1.61]. A post-hoc analysis showed the greatest difference in balance confidence immediately after an unsupervised phase. CONCLUSIONS: The WiiNWalk intervention improved balance confidence, but not walking-related physical function in older adult lower limb prosthesis users. Future rehabilitation games should be specific to the amputation context.Clinical Trial Registration number, NCT01942798.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".