MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405965946 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igae098.2848

ACTIVOT: PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF AN INTERVENTION TO IMPROVE HEALTH-PROMOTING DAILY ACTIVITY

2024· article· en· W4405965946 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tara C. Klinedinst, Nicholas Hollman, Carrie Ciro, Darla E. Kendzor

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)PsychologyEnvironmental healthMedicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nearly half of older adults in the U.S. have multiple chronic conditions in addition to functional limitations that restrict health-promoting daily activity (e.g., sleep, medication-taking, physical activity). We tested an innovative combination of behavioral activation and occupational therapy techniques to improve performance of meaningful, healthy activity. The ActivOT intervention was delivered by occupational therapists in 10 weekly sessions in participant homes. The primary outcome is performance of health-promoting daily activity, measured by the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) at baseline, 10-weeks, and 22-weeks. We report outcome data from 17 participants who were randomized to ActivOT or brief education (n=9 Tx, n=8 Control). On average, participants were 73.0 years old (SD=6.9), majority female (n=13), and White (n=1 Black, n=1 Hispanic/Latino). They had an average of 3.9 chronic conditions (SD=1.4), and 1.9 functional limitations (SD=1.7). The average COPM performance score (out of 10) at baseline was similar for the ActivOT group (M=3.6, SD=1.6) and control group (M=3.3, SD=1.1). At 10-week follow-up, the ActivOT group average increased to 7.0 (SD=1.7) and further increased to 7.2 (SD=1.0) at 22-weeks. In comparison, the control group average increased to 5.9 (SD=2.0) at 10-weeks, then decreased to 5.0 (SD=2.2) at 22-weeks. Further, 89% percent of the ActivOT group reported clinically significant improvements on the COPM (MCID=3). Results show an initial increase in both groups, but the increases are only maintained in the ActivOT group. This study is in progress (aiming for n=40) but shows promise for improving performance of health-promoting daily activity in a difficult-to-treat population.

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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.345 · 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
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 topicPhysical Activity and Health→French-language works237,207→