MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389540911 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3669414/v1

A live online exercise program for older adults improves depression and life-space mobility: A mixed-methods pilot randomized controlled trial

2023· preprint· en· W4389540911 on OpenAlexafffund
Giulia Coletta, Kenneth S. Noguchi, Kayla Beaudoin, Angelica McQuarrie, Ada Tang, Meridith Griffin, Rebecca Ganann, Stuart M. Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Institutes of HealthOntario Centre of InnovationDairy Farmers of CanadaMcMaster University
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyLonelinessMedicineChecklistAnxietyIntervention (counseling)GerontologyPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Aging is the primary risk factor for sarcopenia and mobility limitations. Exercise reduces these risks, but older adults have lower levels of participation in physical activity and exercise. We investigated the preliminary effectiveness of a live, online exercise program on community-dwelling older adults' physical activity levels. Methods A mixed-method pilot randomized controlled trial was conducted according to CONSORT 2010 statement: extension for pilot and feasibility trials. Sedentary, generally healthy older adults (65–80 years) were randomly assigned to the online exercise intervention (ACTIVE) or a waitlist control (CON) group. Outcomes were measured pre-randomization and following the 8-week intervention for ACTIVE and CON and two months following the end of the intervention for the ACTIVE group. Outcomes included habitual physical activity levels, depression, anxiety, loneliness, life-space mobility, nutrition risk, and feasibility. All participants were invited to participate post-intervention in individual semi-structured qualitative interviews. Reporting of the qualitative research followed the checklist for the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting research. Results Seventeen older adults (71% women) were allocated to ACTIVE group, while 15 were allocated to CON group (87% women). Following the intervention, participants in the ACTIVE group reported reduced feelings of depression and improved life-space mobility compared to waitlist control participants. The ACTIVE group had good adherence (97%) and acceptability (98%). Twenty-two participants participated in qualitative interviews. Four themes were identified, including (1) Feasibility of the online exercise program; (2) Perceived health benefits and improvements; (3) Registered Kinesiologists and Physiotherapists contributed to perceived safety; (4) Social connectivity associated with synchronous/live delivery; and (5) Growing old gracefully and preventing disability. Conclusions Our online exercise program was acceptable to older adults, had good adherence, reduced depression, and increased life space. Participants reported improved functional and mental health benefits. Further research is warranted to expand on these findings. Trial registration NCT04627493; 13/11/2020

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)0.006
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 score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.403 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicPhysical Activity and Health→French-language works237,207→