MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385076380 · doi:10.1093/ageing/afad104.077

1540 YOGA FOR OLDER ADULTS WITH MULTIMORBIDITY: RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL WITH EMBEDDED ECONOMIC AND PROCESS EVALUATIONS

2023· article· en· W4385076380 on OpenAlexaff
Garry A. Tew, Lindsay F. Wiley, Lesley Ward, Jess Hugill-Jones, Camila Maturana, Caroline Fairhurst, Kerry Bell, Laura Bissell, Alison Booth, Jenny Howsam, Valerie Mount, Tim Rapley, S Ronaldson, F. Clifford Rose, David Torgerson, David Yates, Catherine Hewitt

Bibliographic record

VenueAge and Ageing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)LonelinessRandomized controlled trialDepression (economics)Intervention (counseling)AnxietyPhysical therapyClinical endpointAdverse effectGerontologyPsychiatryNursingSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Older adults with multimorbidity can experience poor health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Yoga has the potential to improve HRQOL. The British Wheel of Yoga’s Gentle Years Yoga© (GYY) programme was developed for older adults with chronic conditions. We investigated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the GYY programme in older adults with multimorbidity. Method This was a multi-site, individually randomised, open, superiority trial with embedded economic and process evaluations. Community-dwelling adults aged ≥65 years with ≥2 chronic conditions were recruited from general practices. All participants continued with usual care. Intervention participants were offered a 12-week GYY programme, which changed from face-to-face to online delivery during COVID-19. Most outcomes were participant reported. The primary outcome and endpoint was health-related utility measured using the EQ-5D-5L over 12 months. Secondary outcomes were HRQOL, depression, anxiety, loneliness, falls, adverse events and healthcare resource use. Results The mean age of the 454 participants was 73.5 years, 60.6% were female, and the median number of conditions was three. The primary analysis (n=422) showed no statistically or clinically significant difference in the EQ-5D-5L utility score over 12 months (adjusted mean difference of 0.020 favouring intervention; 95% CI -0.006 to 0.045, p=0.14). No statistically significant differences were observed in key secondary outcomes. No serious, related adverse events were reported. The intervention cost £80.85 more per participant (95% CI £76.73 to £84.97) than usual care, generated an additional 0.0178 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per participant (95% CI 0.0175 to 0.0180), and had a 79% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained. Conclusion The GYY programme showed no statistically significant benefits in terms of HRQOL, mental health, loneliness or falls. However, the intervention was safe, acceptable to most participants, and highly valued by some. The economic evaluation suggests that the intervention could be cost-effective.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAge and AgeingSame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207