Protocol for the Brain Health Support Program Study of the Canadian Therapeutic Platform Trial for Multidomain Interventions to Prevent Dementia (CAN-THUMBS UP): A Prospective 12-Month Intervention Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: CAN-THUMBS UP is designed as a comprehensive and innovative fully remote program to 1) develop an interactive and compelling online Brain Health Support Program intervention, with potential to positively influence dementia literacy, self-efficacy and lifestyle risk factors; 2) enroll and retain a community-dwelling Platform Trial Cohort of individuals at risk of dementia who will participate in the intervention; 3) support an open platform trial to test a variety of multidomain interventions that might further benefit individuals at risk of dementia. This manuscript presents the Brain Health Support Program Study protocol. DESIGN/SETTING: Twelve-month prospective multi-center longitudinal study to evaluate a fully remote web-based educational intervention. Participants will subsequently be part of a Platform Trial Cohort and may be eligible to participate in further dementia prevention clinical trials. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred fifty older adults who are cognitively unimpaired or have mild cognitive impairment, with at least 1 well established dementia risk factor. INTERVENTION: Participants engage in the Brain Health Support Program intervention for 45-weeks and complete pre/post intervention measures. This intervention is designed to convey best available evidence for dementia prevention, consists of 181 chapters within 8 modules that are progressively delivered, and is available online in English and French. The program has been developed as a collaborative effort by investigators with recognized expertise in the program's content areas, along with input from older-adult citizen advisors. MEASUREMENTS: This study utilizes adapted remote assessments with accessible technologies (e.g. videoconferencing, cognitive testing via computer and mobile phone, wearable devices to track physical activity and sleep, self-administered saliva sample collection). The primary outcome is change in dementia literacy, as measured by the Alzheimer's Disease Knowledge Scale. Secondary outcomes include change in self-efficacy; engagement using the online program; user satisfaction ratings; and evaluation of usability and acceptance. Exploratory outcomes include changes in attitudes toward dementia, modifiable risk factors, performance on the Neuropsychological Test Battery, performance on self-administered online cognitive assessments, and levels of physical activity and sleep; success of the national recruitment plan; and the distribution of age adjusted polygenic hazard scores. CONCLUSIONS: This fully remote study provides an accessible approach to research with all study activities being completed in the participants' home environment. This approach may reduce barriers to participation, provide an easier and less demanding participant experience, and reach a broader geography with recruitment from all regions of Canada. CAN-THUMBS UP represents a Canadian contribution to the global World-Wide FINGERS program (alz.org/wwfingers).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.029 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.064 | 0.014 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".