MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4296130329 · doi:10.1101/2022.09.13.22279895

Home-based High Intensity Functional Strength Training (HIFST) for Older Adults: A Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial and Qualitative Description of an Exercise Program to Prevent Functional Decline after an Injury

2022· preprint· en· W4296130329 on OpenAlexaff
Ashley Morgan, Ada Tang, Jennifer J. Heisz, Lehana Thabane, Julie Richardson

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonImpactMcMaster University Medical CentreMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationIntervention (counseling)Confidence intervalProtocol (science)PsychologyNursingAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background Slip, trips, and falls are a common cause of injury in older adults; limiting physical activity participation and mobility task performance. These injuries may result in preclinical mobility limitation (PCML), a period in which individuals report modifications but not difficulty in mobility tasks. Individuals with PCML are at risk of functional decline which can be prevented with exercise. High-intensity functional strength training (HIFST) involves short intervals of ‘hard’ interspersed with ‘easy’ exercise that may be a time efficient strategy to improve functioning for older adults experiencing PCML. Objective This protocol outlines the rationale, methods, and planned analyses for a pilot randomized controlled trial and qualitative description (QD) to investigate the feasibility, preliminary effects, and acceptability of a home-based 12-week HIFST intervention for community-dwelling older adults (≥ 55 years) with PCML who have had an injury from a slip, trip, or fall. Methods Twenty-four participants (target) will be randomized into a 12-week home-based HIFST or lower extremity stretching intervention. Feasibility will be determined using criteria for adherence, recruitment, retention, and safety and results will be presented using descriptive statistics. Preliminary effects on physical functioning, cognitive functioning, enjoyment, and harms will be assessed and presented as mean between-group differences with 95% confidence intervals. HIFST participants will be recruited for follow-up interviews using QD methodology to investigate the acceptability of the intervention. The results of this pilot trial will provide essential information for future research regarding the process, resources, and scientific merit of conducting home-based high-intensity exercise in a post-injury older adult population. Trial Registration NCT05266911

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)0.058
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0580.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0530.008

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→