MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403886177 · doi:10.1101/2024.10.27.24316246

Impact of a low-threshold exercise and protein supplementation intervention to optimise physical function and target frailty in people experiencing homelessness and addiction: The LEAP II trial

2024· preprint· en· W4403886177 on OpenAlexaff
Fiona Kennedy, Clíona Ní Cheallaigh, Román Romero‐Ortuño, Deirdre Murray, Julie Broderick

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)AddictionGerontologyPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationFunction (biology)MedicinePhysical therapyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objective Frailty is a state of physiological vulnerability and associated with adverse outcomes. People experiencing homelessness and addiction have a higher burden of frailty than the general population. This study’s aim was to test the feasibility and impact of an exercise intervention with protein supplementation to target low physical functioning and frailty in this population, which was flexibly delivered over 12 weeks, with exercise options three days per week. Methods The primary outcome of feasibility was measured by recruitment, retention, adherence, acceptability and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were physical function, pain, frailty and nutritional status, and self-reported health. Results Forty-three participants enrolled. Overall retention was 69.8%, with higher retention observed in subgroups (women and older adults). Programme adherence and acceptability was reported in 93% and 100% of participants, respectively. No adverse events occurred. At baseline, sub-normative values were demonstrated for limb strength and balance; pain was prevalent in 34.8%; 23% had poor nutritional health between 32.5% and 72.1% lived with some degree of frailty. Significant improvements were demonstrated for lower limb strength, gait speed, pain, nutritional status and frailty, (p<0.05). Conclusions This novel intervention delivered to this hard-to-reach population was shown to be feasible and impactful, indicating proof of concept.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.359 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicCOVID-19 and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→