MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283782689 · doi:10.1111/jgs.17941

Effect of a physical activity intervention and frailty on frailty trajectory and major mobility disability

2022· article· en· W4283782689 on OpenAlexaff
Jack Quach, Olga Theou, Mario Ulises Pérez‐Zepeda, Judith Godin, Kenneth Rockwood, D. Scott Kehler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Health AuthorityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionFrailty IndexIntervention (counseling)Baseline (sea)GerontologyPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) interventions may reduce the burden of frailty and can prevent mobility disability for older adults. We explored whether a 2-year PA intervention would improve frailty trajectory, lead to clinically meaningful frailty changes (CMC), or impact major mobility disability (MMD) across baseline frailty levels. METHODS: We analyzed data for 1635 community-dwelling participants who were 70-89 years old (mean baseline age [SD]: 78.9 [5.2] years, 67.2% female) from the Lifestyle Interventions and Independence Study. Participants were randomized to either PA or health education (HE) intervention. A 44-item frailty index (FI) was constructed at baseline and 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 years after baseline. CMC was defined as change in FI of ≥0.03. MMD was the inability to complete a 400 m-walk within 15 min without assistance. Mixed-effects models were used to estimate frailty trajectory and CMC. Cox regression models were used to determine whether the effect of PA on the composite of MMD or death differed by baseline FI. RESULTS: Mean FI (SD) at baseline for both the PA and HE groups was 0.18 (0.10). Two years after baseline, mean FIs were 0.23 (0.12) for PA and 0.24 (0.12) for HE. The MMD rates were 30.1% (246/818) and 35.5% (290/817) for PA and HE, respectively. There was no time-by-intervention interaction for frailty trajectory or for CMC. Regarding the composite MMD and death, there was no FI-by-intervention interaction. Simple association analyses revealed that when baseline FI was centered at 0.15 or higher, the PA intervention was associated with lower risk of MMD or death compared to HE (HR [CI] range for FI ≥ 0.15: 0.65-0.81 [0.43-0.67, 0.90-0.98]). CONCLUSION: Participants in both groups showed similar frailty trajectories and CMC. Those who were frailer benefitted more from the PA intervention regarding MMD and death and may be a focus of recruitments for future PA program.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations34
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Geriatrics SocietySame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207