MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403849970 · doi:10.12688/hrbopenres.13678.2

A study to explore the role of a low threshold, fitness focussed physical rehabilitation intervention with protein supplementation to target physical function and frailty in people with problematic substance use and homelessness: protocol for a single-arm pre-post intervention study.

2024· preprint· en· W4403849970 on OpenAlexaff
Fiona Kennedy, Clíona Ní Cheallaigh, Román Romero‐Ortuño, Suzanne L. Doyle, Julie Broderick

Bibliographic record

VenueHRB Open Research · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
FundersTrinity College DublinHealth Research Board
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)RehabilitationMedicinePopulationPhysical fitnessGerontologyRandomized controlled trialAddictionPhysical therapyMental healthPsychological interventionPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychiatryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: People who are homeless are more likely to experience poor mental health and addiction as well as suffering from non-communicable diseases. There is evidence of frailty and accelerated physical ageing among people experiencing homelessness. Appropriate physical rehabilitation and nutritional supplementation strategies can stabilise or reverse frailty and general physical decline, but it is not known how this type of intervention would work in practice in this population. Aim: To evaluate the feasibility and pre-post intervention impact of a low threshold physical rehabilitation intervention with protein supplementation to target physical functioning and frailty in people with problematic substance use who are experiencing homelessness. Methods: The intervention will consist of a 12-week low threshold rehabilitation programme with protein supplementation. Participants will be service users of the Ballyfermot Advance Project, a day services centre for people with addiction issues and experiencing homelessness. Primary outcomes will be feasibility including numbers recruited, retention of participants and adherence to the exercise intervention and protein supplement. Any adverse events will be recorded. Secondary outcomes will be strength and muscular mass, physical performance and lower extremity physical function, pain, frailty and nutritional status. Discussion: An immediate impact may be simply a distraction from difficult circumstances and potentially an improvement of physical health of participants, which can be a conduit for the emergence of other positive behaviours and recovery. Longer term, this study will generate preliminary data on which to inform the design of a definitive randomised controlled trial of physical rehabilitation and protein supplementation, if indicated. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval was granted by the Faculty of Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee in TCD. Study findings will be disseminated through publication into an international peer-reviewed journal and presented at national and international conferences.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0070.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.007

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.

Opus teacher head0.179
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHRB Open Research→Same topicHomelessness and Social Issues→French-language works237,207→