The effects of walking on frailty, cognitive function and quality of life among inactive older adults in Saudi Arabia: a study protocol of randomized control trial by comparing supervised group-based intervention and non-supervised individual-based intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) demographics are also changing with the increase in life expectancy in the country and the rise in the number of older Saudi Arabians. Saudi Arabia has a higher rate of physically inactive people, and most of them are between the ages of 55-64. Walking is one of the most prevalent forms of physical activity in Saudi Arabia and the study showed that most people prefer walking for recreational and health benefits. Therefore, the purpose of the proposed study is to compare the effects of supervised group-based walking and non-supervised individual-based walking interventions on frailty, cognitive function and quality of life among inactive older adults in Saudi Arabia. METHOD: This study will apply a three-group (2 intervention groups and 1 control group), double-blinded, randomized controlled trial (RCT) to examine the effect of different forms of walking interventions on Saudi Arabia older adults' frailty, cognitive function and quality of life immediately after a 16-week intervention, as well as the residual effects 12 weeks after completion of the interventions. DISCUSSION: This study aims to determine whether supervised group walking and non-supervised individual walking lead to different effects. Given the limited evidence in the literature regarding Saudi Arabia older adults' physical fitness and health, it is worthwhile to explore the effect of walking, as well as the forms of walking on improving the overall physical fitness and psychological status of older adults in Saudi Arabia. The findings of the current study could also create awareness of the government and the general public in Saudi Arabia of the ageing problems and the effective ways of achieving better intervention results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at the ClinicalTrials.gov PRS (Trial ID: NCT05151575; Date of first posted: 12/07/2021).
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 | 0.020 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.004 |
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".