MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385073683 · doi:10.1093/ageing/afad104.078

1543 PROMOTING ACTIVITY, INDEPENDENCE AND STABILITY IN EARLY DEMENTIA AND MCI: THE PRAISED RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL

2023· article· en· W4385073683 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rowan Harwood, A Brand, Sarah Goldberg, Tahir Masud, Veronika van der Wardt, John Gladman, Pip Logan, Zoë Hoare, Vicky Booth, Laura D Howe, Alison Cowley, Raazi Bajwa, Clare Burgon, Claudio Di Lorito, Maureen Godfrey, Mark Dunlop, Timothy N. Welsh

Bibliographic record

VenueAge and Ageing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentDementiaRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyConfidence intervalActivities of daily livingBalance (ability)Quality of life (healthcare)GerontologyInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction People living with dementia and MCI progressively lose abilities, through increasing cognitive impairment, co-morbidities, inactivity, acute illnesses and injuries. Rehabilitation therapy may reduce disability and falls and increase resilience. Methods We co-produced a therapy intervention, comprising strength, balance and dual-task exercises, functional activity training and promoting community access, providing up to 50 therapy sessions, delivered over 12 months and underpinned by a behaviour change strategy. We evaluated the intervention in a 5-site multi-centred Randomised Controlled Trial, against a brief assessment control. Participants had a diagnosis of dementia or MCI, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) between 13 and 25. Primary outcome was the Disability Assessment in Dementia (DAD), an ADL score, after 12 months, alongside a battery of other health status measures. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated modifications. Results We recruited 365 participants, 42% female. Median age was 81 years (range 65-95), MoCA 20 (13-26), DAD 82 (5-100). Baseline balance between groups was good. Participants were predominantly white and socioeconomically advantaged. Intervention group participants received a median of 31 (IQR 22-40) session and undertook and additional mean 121 minutes of exercise per week. Assessed fidelity was good. 290 (79%) were followed up. There were no significant differences in DAD score (adjusted mean difference -1.3/100, 95% CI -5.2 to +2.6; effect size (d) -0.06; -0.26 to 0.15; p=0.5), physical activity, balance, quality of life, cognition or a range of other measures. Upper 95% confidence intervals excluded even small benefits. Rate of falling reduced by 22% (Rate Ratio=0.78; 0.46 to 1.3; p=0.3), but this was not statistically significant. Conclusions The intensive PrAISED intervention did not improve measured outcomes. It may be impossible to reduce the rate of functional decline in dementia. Alternatively, the pandemic may have distorted outcomes or participants may have been too advantaged to benefit. There may have been unmeasured psycho-social benefits.

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)0.003
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAge and AgeingSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207