Effects of a multicomponent physical activity programme, Mobility-Fit, compared with a standard care lower limb strengthening programme, to promote safe mobility among older adults in care facilities: protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Upper limb and core strength training is essential for older adults to safely perform daily activities. However, existing exercise programmes mainly focus on lower limb strength and are not designed or delivered to suit people with different functional capacities. This study describes the design of a two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial to examine the effects of a multicomponent physical activity (PA) programme, Mobility-Fit, on mobility and frailty in older adults living in care facilities. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 160 older adults from 20 care facilities in Hong Kong will be recruited and randomised by care facilities (1:1) to an intervention or a control group. Participants in the intervention group will attend the Mobility-Fit programme, led by facility-based instructors, three times per week, 45 min per session, for 12 weeks, while the control group will participate in a standard care lower limb strengthening programme offered by the care facility. Participants will then be followed up for 9 months. Mobility-Fit comprises agility, postural coordination, balance and strength training, with suitable dosage based on participant's baseline physical and cognitive function. The primary outcomes encompass upper and lower limb strength, trunk stability, reaction time, mobility function and fall efficacy. Secondary outcomes comprise daily PA level and performance, frailty, cognitive function and quality of life. A repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) and generalised estimating equation (GEE) will be used to examine changes in outcomes over time and between groups. Data will be analysed following the intention-to-treat principles. We will also evaluate programme implementation and health economics throughout the follow-up period. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was acquired in November 2022 from the Joint CUHK-NTEC Clinical Research Ethics Committee in Hong Kong (CREC-2022-459). Informed consent will be obtained from participants. The results of the study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed articles, conference presentations and social media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2300072709.
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 | 0.024 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.052 | 0.007 |
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".