A randomised controlled trial of acceptance and commitment therapy for improving quality of life in people with muscle diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Chronic muscle diseases (MD) are progressive and cause wasting and weakness in muscles and are associated with reduced quality of life (QoL). The ACTMuS trial examined whether Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) as an adjunct to usual care improved QoL for such patients as compared to usual care alone. Methods This two-arm, randomised, multicentre, parallel design recruited 155 patients with MD (Hospital and Depression Scale ⩾ 8 for depression or ⩾ 8 for anxiety and Montreal Cognitive Assessment ⩾ 21/30). Participants were randomised, using random block sizes, to one of two groups: standard medical care (SMC) ( n = 78) or to ACT in addition to SMC ( n = 77), and were followed up to 9 weeks. The primary outcome was QoL, assessed by the Individualised Neuromuscular Quality of Life Questionnaire (INQoL), the average of five subscales, at 9-weeks. Trial registration was NCT02810028. Results 138 people (89.0%) were followed up at 9-weeks. At all three time points, the adjusted group difference favoured the intervention group and was significant with moderate to large effect sizes. Secondary outcomes (mood, functional impairment, aspects of psychological flexibility) also showed significant differences between groups at week 9. Conclusions ACT in addition to usual care was effective in improving QoL and other psychological and social outcomes in patients with MD. A 6 month follow up will determine the extent to which gains are maintained.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 teacher head, 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".