MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286632111 · doi:10.3389/fresc.2022.898804

A Remotely Delivered Progressive Walking Intervention for Adults With Persistent Symptoms of a Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Feasibility and Exploration of Its Impact

2022· article· en· W4286632111 on OpenAlexafffund
Christophe Alarie, Isabelle Gagnon, Élaine de Guise, Michelle McKerral, Marietta Kersalé, Béatrice van het Hoog, Bonnie Swaine

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Children's HospitalUniversité de MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéUniversité de Montréal
KeywordsTraumatic brain injuryIntervention (counseling)Physical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePhysical therapyPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Persistent post-concussion symptoms following a mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) can impact function and participation of adults. Physical activity is recommended to reduce symptoms and foster return to normal activities. Adults with a mTBI may have personal factors or experience accessibility issues restricting physical activity. Walking is a physical activity accessible to most that could be delivered remotely. Objectives Determine the feasibility, safety, and acceptability of a remotely delivered progressive walking intervention designed for adults with persistent mTBI symptoms and explore its effects on health-related outcomes. Methodology This feasibility study using a single-group pre-post mixed methods convergent parallel design was conducted remotely. Adults aged 18–65 years with a mTBI reporting persistent symptoms for ≥3 months were recruited. The 8-week remote progressive walking intervention aimed to increase the weekly number of steps walked by 40% based on a 1-week baseline measured by a Fitbit Inspire 2 activity monitor. Feasibility measures were about the intervention, its remote delivery, safety, and acceptability. Health-related outcomes were post-concussion symptoms, kinesiophobia, mood, sleep, fatigue, and quality of life. Semi-structured exit interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed separately, and results merged, compared, and contrasted. Descriptive statistics and paired samplest-tests were used. The qualitative analyses followed an iterative content analysis approach using reflexivity and triangulation of sources. Results Twenty adults (16 women) aged 42.5 ± 11.51 years with persisting symptoms for 9.25 ± 6.43 months participated, adhered to 94.38% of sessions, completed the intervention, and found it to be feasible, safe and acceptable. Participants increased weekly total number of steps walked (change = 14,886 ± 18,283;t= 3.55,p= 0.002). Severity of post-concussion symptoms (change = −6.42 ± 10.69;t= −2.62,p= 0.018), kinesiophobia (change = −5 ± 6.86;t= 3.18,p= 0.005), anxiety (change = −1.53 ± 3.01;t= −2.21,p= 0.04), and fatigue (change = −10.21 ± 10.20;t= −4.37,p< 0.001) were reduced, whilst quality of life improved (change = 10.58 ± 13.35;t= 3.46,p= 0.003). Participants' perceptions corroborate most quantitative results; they felt improved self-efficacy about physical activity and provided five key recommendations. Discussion This study demonstrates the feasibility, safety, and acceptability of the remote 8-week progressive walking intervention, a promising approach to reduce persisting symptoms, improve physical activity level health-related outcomes and quality of life of adults with persistent post-concussion symptoms following a mTBI.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Rehabilitation SciencesSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207