MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408292551 · doi:10.2196/65213

Multihealth Promotion Programs on Physical Health and Quality of Life in Older Adults: Quasi-Experimental Study

2025· article· en· W4408292551 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Li‐Yun Lee, Heng‐Hsin Tung, George P. Liao, Su-Ju Liu, Zi-Yu Chen, Yea‐Ru Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Journal of Medical Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintHealth promotionPromotion (chess)Quality (philosophy)Quality of life (healthcare)PsychologyGerontologyComputer scienceMedicinePolitical scienceNursingPublic healthPhysicsWorld Wide WebPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Physical activity and appropriate nutrition are essential for older adults. Improving physical health and quality of life can lead to healthy aging. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the long-term effects of multihealth promotion programs on the physical and mental health of older adults in communities. METHODS: A quasi-experimental method was used to recruit 112 older adults voluntarily from a pharmacy in central Taiwan between April 2021 and February 2023. Participants were divided into an experimental group receiving a multihealth promotion program and a control group with no specific intervention. The study measured frailty, nutritional status, well-being, and quality of life using standardized tools such as the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), Mini-Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (MNA-SF), Well-being Scale for Elders, and the EQ-5D-3L. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, independent t tests, Pearson correlation, and generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: A total of 112 participants were recruited. There were 64 (57.1%) in the experimental group and 48 (42.9%) in the control group. The experimental group exhibited significantly better quality of life (EQ-5D index) at weeks 12 (β=-.59; P=.01) and 24 (β=-.44; P=.04) compared to the control group. The experimental group muscle mass significantly increased at weeks 24 (β=4.29; P<.01) and 36 (β=3.03; P=.01). Upper limb strength improved significantly at weeks 12 (β=3.4; P=.04) and 36 (β=5; P=.01), while core strength showed significant gains at weeks 12 (β=4.43; P=.01) and 36 (β=6.99; P<.01). Lower limb strength increased significantly only at week 12 (β=4.15; P=.01). Overall physical performance improved significantly at weeks 12 (β=5.47; P<.01), 24 (β=5.17; P<.01), and 36 (β=8.79; P<.01). CONCLUSIONS: The study's findings highlight the practical benefits of interventions, including physical and social activities and nutritional support, in enhancing the quality of life and general physical health of older adults. This study's findings have significant implications for clinical practice. These findings can aid in the establishment of effective interventions for older adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05412251; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05412251.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.557
Teacher spread0.424 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Journal of Medical ResearchSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207