EMBOLDEN: Implementing a co-designed integrated model to improve health, mobility, and connections among older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: Mobility barriers in older adults can lead to isolation, poor physical and mental health, loss of independence, and decreased quality of life. The EMBOLDEN program, a multi-component intervention including physical activity (PA), healthy eating, socialization, and system navigation, was co-developed with older adults and service providers to improve mobility for older adults in real world settings. Objective: To examine feasibility and acceptability of the program through a mixed methods Randomized Control Trial (RCT). Study Design and Analysis: The study protocol, recruitment, data collection methods, and program were piloted. Data were collected through program documentation, a focus group with interventionists, wearable mobility technology, participant surveys, and qualitative interviews with intervention group participants. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively; content analysis was used for qualitative data. Setting: Hamilton, ON, Canada. Population Studied: Communitydwelling older adults (≥ 55 years). Intervention: A 9-week 90-minute virtual multi-component group program plus usual care compared to usual care alone. The program was jointly delivered through primary care, public health, and municipal recreation department providers. Outcome Measures: Outcomes included dose and adoption rates, intervention fidelity, implementation factors, program acceptability, and preliminary effects. Results: Thirty-one individuals were assessed for eligibility; 12 did not meet inclusion criteria. Eight declined to participate due to prior time commitments. Eleven participants were enrolled; 10 were randomized (6 intervention, 4 control). Participants ranged from 57-76 years of age and the majority were female. Five participants completed the intervention; all attended at least 6 of 9 sessions. Intervention fidelity was over 95% across all sessions. Participation facilitators/barriers, and perceived program benefits (e.g., health behaviour changes) and challenges (e.g., socializing virtually) were reported. Program components were evaluated separately by participants, with food preparation demonstrations rated highest. The feasibility study informed refinements to program delivery and outcome measures. Conclusions: Participants found the program useful and offered feedback on ways to improve it, including in-person delivery. The pilot trial demonstrated a larger pragmatic RCT of EMBOLDEN is feasible and provided lessons for implementation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".