MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Feasibility And Associated Physical Activity Outcomes Using An Online Exercise Program For Older Adults.

2023· article· en· W4387062651 on OpenAlexaff
Giulia Coletta, Angelica McQuarrie, Ada Tang, Meridith Griffin, Stuart M. Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessAnxietyAttendanceRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyUCLA Loneliness ScaleMedicineGeriatric Depression ScaleDepression (economics)Intervention (counseling)GerontologyPhysical activityPsychologyPsychiatryDepressive symptoms

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sedentary behaviour can accelerate age-related diseases and result in depression, anxiety, and loneliness. Physical activity can help to mitigate the risks of sedentary behaviour for older adults and alleviate mental health-related outcomes. Online exercise programs are valuable modes of delivery to facilitate exercise programs for older adults. PURPOSE: To determine the effectiveness and feasibility of an age-appropriate, ability-modified online exercise program delivered by trained exercise professionals for older adults. METHODS: In this pilot RCT, physically inactive community-dwelling older adults (65-80 years) were randomly assigned to a waitlist control (CON) or an active group (ACTIVE) of a thrice-weekly, 8-wk online live exercise program delivered via Zoom. Attendance was recorded, and participant satisfaction with the intervention was assessed. Pre- and post-intervention accelerometry-derived daily steps, daily active energy expenditure, and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) duration over 7 consecutive days were assessed. Depression, anxiety, and loneliness were assessed using the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), the Geriatric Anxiety Inventory (GAI), and the revised UCLA Loneliness Scale (R-UCLA). RESULTS: 31 participants (77% women) participated in the RCT. Participants were randomized into the ACTIVE group (n = 16; 70 ± 4 years) and the CON group (n = 15; 72 ± 5 years). The ACTIVE group attended 97% of the online classes, and 98% reported satisfaction with the program. There was no effect of the intervention compared to CON on daily steps (ACTIVE = 4336 ± 2638 steps/d; CON = 3125 ± 1250 steps/d), daily activity energy expenditure (ACTIVE = 227 ± 249 Kcal/d; CON = 119 ± 166 Kcal/d), and MVPA (ACTIVE = 42 ± 44 min/d; CON = 23 ± 30 min/d). An effect of the intervention was observed for depression from pre-intervention (ACTIVE = 3.9 ± 2.4; CON = 3.5 ± 2.1) to post-intervention (ACTIVE = 2.0 ± 1.7; CON = 3.5 ± 2.1; p = 0.015). There was no intervention effect compared to CON on anxiety or loneliness. CONCLUSION: Our age-appropriate, ability-modified online exercise program had good feasibility and adherence. We demonstrated preliminary insights into the feasibility and efficacy of a live online exercise program on older adults’ habitual physical activity levels and mental health.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicPhysical Activity and Health→French-language works237,207→