MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405964419 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igae098.3034

TESTING THE IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK FOR BEHAVIORAL AND LIFESTYLE INTERVENTIONS IN ALZHEIMER’S DISEASE (MOBILIZE)

2024· article· en· W4405964419 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dereck Salisbury, Fang Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseasePsychological interventionGerontologyAging in placePsychologyMedicinePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Implementing multi-site behavioral intervention trials in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) has many unique challenges, leading to substantial variations in delivered intervention doses and cognitive findings. These issues can be addressed by the IMplementation Framework fOr Behavioral and LIfestyLe Interventions In AlZheimer’s DiseasE (MOBILIZE) that was developed to guide the design and implementation of behavioral interventions in AD. Methods This study systematically evaluated the implementation outcomes of the multi-site aerobic exercise and cognitive training (ACT) trial that employed MOBILIZE. Building on the person-centered care principle, MOBILIZE includes three implementation outcomes (screening, intervention adherence, and safety) with corresponding team processes to guide trial implementation. Screening was operationalized as the duration (days) between each screening visit, last screening visit to enrollment, and enrollment to first intervention session. Intervention adherence outcomes included: adherence (attendance), session dose adherence (calculated by dividing the number of sessions that achieved >=70% of the prescribed session dose / total number of sessions completed), and days required to complete the prescribed 72 sessions. Safety was operationalized as the type, number, and severity of study-related adverse events (AEs). RESULTS. The sample (n=146) was 73.8±5.7 years in age and 23.4±2.1 on Montreal Cognitive Assessment score, with 48.0% female, and 91.8% white. Screening-to-enrollment averaged 117.4±71.7 days. Intervention adherence was 77.4%±28.3%. There was 9-study related adverse events. Screening-to-enrollment and intervention adherence differed across sites, mainly due to COVID-19 influence. CONCLUSIONS. MOBILIZE helped the ACT Trial achieve high intervention adherence and safety and may be particularly important for early-stage and multi-site trials in AD.

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)0.166
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.121
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.879

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1660.121
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.641
GPT teacher head0.686
Teacher spread0.046 · 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 designObservational
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 venueInnovation in Aging→Same topicHealth Policy Implementation Science→French-language works237,207→