MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391685626 · doi:10.1177/13524585241229332

Drop-out, adherence, and compliance in randomized controlled trials of exercise training in multiple sclerosis: Short report

2024· article· en· W4391685626 on OpenAlexaff
Robert W. Motl, Daniel Russell, Lara A. Pilutti, Alexandra P. Metse, Claudia H. Marck, Bryan Chan, Peixuan Zheng, Yvonne C. Learmonth

Bibliographic record

VenueMultiple Sclerosis Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialMedicinePhysical therapyCompliance (psychology)Drop outPatient complianceMeta-analysisIntervention (counseling)Multiple sclerosisInternal medicinePsychologyFamily medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We documented reporting and rates of drop-out, adherence, and compliance from 40 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in our meta-analysis on safety of exercise training (ET) in MS. We adopted definitions and metrics of adherence and compliance provided by the MoXFo adherence group. Drop-out was reported in 100% of the RCTs and approximated 10% for intervention and control conditions. Adherence and compliance were reported in approximately 50% and 10% of the RCTs, respectively, and approximated 80% and 70%, respectively. Standardized metrics for reporting adherence and compliance are important in future RCTs for understanding the impact on outcomes and translation of research evidence into practice.

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)0.339
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.608
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.661
Threshold uncertainty score0.815

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3390.608
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.019
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
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 head0.350
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.037 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMultiple Sclerosis JournalSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207