MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224997229 · doi:10.2196/34654

Live Video Mind-Body Program for Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis, Comorbid Depression, and Obesity: Development and Feasibility Pilot Study

2022· article· en· W4224997229 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ryan A. Mace, Jonathan Greenberg, Nicole Lemaster, Brooke A. Duarte, Terence M. Penn, Millan R. Kanaya, James Doorley, Jessica L. Burris, Cale A. Jacobs, Ana‐Maria Vranceanu

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Complementary and Integrative HealthNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsMedicineBiopsychosocial modelFocus groupPhysical therapyPopulationDepression (economics)WOMACOsteoarthritisGerontologyPsychiatryAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is the most common joint disorder in the United States and a leading cause of disability. Depression and obesity are highly comorbid with KOA and accelerate knee degeneration and disability through biopsychosocial mechanisms. Mind-body physical activity programs can engage biological, mechanical, and psychological mechanisms to improve outcomes in KOA, but such programs are not currently available. OBJECTIVE: This mixed methods study aims to adapt a mind-body activity program for the unique needs of patients with KOA, depression, and obesity (GetActive-OA) delivered via live video. METHODS: ), idiopathic KOA with mild to moderate radiographic changes, and elevated depressive symptoms (9-item Patient Health Questionnaire ≥10) recruited from 2 orthopedic centers. In phase 1, we developed GetActive-OA and the study protocol using qualitative focus group feedback from the study population (N=9; 2 focus groups, 90 minutes) and multidisciplinary expertise from clinical psychologists and orthopedic researchers. In phase 2, we explored the initial feasibility, credibility, and acceptability of GetActive-OA, live video delivery, and study procedures via an open pilot with exit interviews (N=5; 1 group). This research was guided by National Institutes of Health (NIH) model stage IA. RESULTS: Phase 1 qualitative analyses revealed nuanced information about challenges with coping and increasing activity, high interest in a mind-body activity program, program participation facilitators (flexibility with technology) and barriers (amotivation and forgetfulness), and perceived challenges with data collection procedures (blood and urine samples and homework). Phase 2 quantitative analyses showed that GetActive-OA met most a priori feasibility markers: acceptability (80%), expectancy (100%), credibility (100%), clinician adherence (90%), homework adherence (80%), questionnaire data collection (100%), program satisfaction (100%), and safety (100%). Adherence to ActiGraph wear (80% baseline, 20% posttest) and collection of blood samples (60%) were low. Participation in GetActive-OA was associated with signals of improvements in general coping (Cohen d=2.41), pain catastrophizing (Cohen d=1.24), depression (Cohen d=0.88), anxiety (Cohen d=0.78), self-efficacy (Cohen d=0.73), pain (Cohen d=0.39), and KOA symptoms (Cohen d=0.36). Qualitative exit interviews confirmed quantitative findings and provided valuable information to optimize the program and protocol. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with KOA, depression, and obesity from rural Kentucky were interested in a live video mind-body activity program. GetActive-OA shows promise; however, the program and protocol require further NIH stage I refinement before formal efficacy testing (NIH model stage II). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1016/j.conctc.2021.100720.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsFrench-language works237,207