MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406967965 · doi:10.1093/ageing/afae277.104

2776 Leveraging Technology for Delivery of dementia prevention interventions remotely: through the Participant’s Lens

2025· article· en· W4406967965 on OpenAlexaff
Karla Faig, A Steeves, M Gallibois, CA McGibbon, Grant Handrigan, Carole C. Tranchant, Alanna Bohnsack, Pamela Jarrett

Bibliographic record

VenueAge and Ageing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of New BrunswickUniversité de MonctonHorizon Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDementiaPsychological interventionOptometryNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objectives The objective of this study was to examine participant’s experience with remote delivery during SYNERGIC@Home/SYNERGIE~Chez soi (NCT04997681), a home-based, double-blind, randomised controlled trial targeting older adults at risk for dementia. Metrics included study adherence, adverse events (AEs), participant’s attitudes towards technology, and protocol deviations (PDs) due to technological difficulties. Methods Participants underwent 16 weeks of physical and cognitive interventions (three sessions/week) remotely administered in their homes via Zoom for HealthcareTM. Participants used a laptop, webcam, and required email and internet access. Throughout the trial, adherence, AEs, and PDs were recorded. Post- intervention, survey questions about satisfaction with technology were administered and semi-structured interviews were conducted which underwent thematic analysis. Results Sixty participants, mean age 68.9 and 76.7% female, were randomised to one of four intervention arms, with 52 completing the 16-week intervention. Adherence rate was 87.5% with no significant difference between treatment arms (p = 0.656). There were 88 AEs reported in 42 participants. The majority (71.6%) of AEs were unrelated to the intervention, and 69.3% were classified as mild. There was one serious AE, unrelated to the intervention. Most (74.9%) participants reported overall satisfaction with technology, with Zoom being both enjoyable (81.0%) and easy to use (96%). Most enjoyed using the computer (87%), and the majority (87.0%) encountered few difficulties with connectivity. Of the 2496 intervention sessions, 14 (0.56%) were missed due to technical difficulties. Technical difficulties requiring modification to the intervention, such as an unstable internet connection, were reported on 79 occasions (3.0%). Themes from the interviews were: participants built rapport with the research assistants; felt better participating; had fun; and technology helped overcome barriers to participation. Conclusions Using technology to deliver dementia prevention interventions remotely was well received by participants Participation occurred safely from the comfort of their own home with few technical difficulties.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAge and AgeingSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207