MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404138075 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-093710

STRIVE pilot trial: a protocol for a multicentre pragmatic internal pilot randomised controlled trial of Structured TRaining to Improve fitness in a Virtual Environment (STRIVE) before surgery

2024· article· en· W4404138075 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Daniel I. McIsaac, Puneeta Tandon, Gurlavine Kidd, Karina Branje, Emily Hladkowicz, Julie Hallet, Duminda N. Wijeysundera, Susan M. Lee, Margaret L. McNeely, Monica Taljaard, Chelsia Gillis

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversitySt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia HospitalSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of OttawaUniversity of AlbertaHealth Sciences CentreOttawa Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of OttawaDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa
KeywordsMedicineProtocol (science)Randomized controlled trialPhysical therapyPilot trialMedical educationAlternative medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Home-based, virtually-supported care models may represent the most efficient and scalable approach to delivering prehabilitation services. However, virtual approaches to prehabilitation are understudied. This manuscript describes the protocol for an internal pilot randomised controlled trial of a virtually-delivered, multimodal prehabilitation intervention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a pragmatic, individual patient, internal pilot randomised controlled trial of home-based, virtually supported, multimodal prehabilitation compared with standard perioperative care in adults undergoing elective, inpatient thoracic, abdominal, pelvic and vascular surgery at five Canadian hospitals. Participants will be partially blinded; clinicians and outcome assessors will be fully blinded. The intervention consists of 3-12 weeks of a home-based, multimodal (exercise, nutrition and psychosocial support) prehabilitation programme supported through an online platform. The primary feasibility outcomes and their progression targets are (1) monthly recruitment of>6 participants at each centre, (2) intervention adherence of>75%, (3) retention of>90% of participants at the patient-reported primary outcome point of 30-days after surgery and (4) elicitation of patient, clinician and researcher-identified barriers to our pragmatic trial. A sample size of 144 participants will be adequate to estimate recruitment, adherence and retention rates with acceptable precision. All participants will be followed to either death or up to 1 year. As an internal pilot, if no substantive changes to the trial or intervention design are required, pilot participant outcome data will migrate, unanalysed by allocation, to the future full-scale trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by Clinical Trials Ontario (Project ID: 4479) and our ethics review board (Protocol Approval #20230399-01T). Results will be disseminated through presentations at scientific conferences, peer-reviewed publications, partner organisations and engagement of social and traditional media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT06042491. Protocol, V.1.2, dated 6 June 2024.

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)0.074
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0740.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0070.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0810.016

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.317 · 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
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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→