MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409532899 · doi:10.2196/70163

Locomotive Syndrome Digital Therapeutics Provided via a Smartphone App: Protocol for a Single-Group Trial

2025· article· en· W4409532899 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tatsuru Sonobe, Yoshihiro Matsumoto

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyTest (biology)Physical medicine and rehabilitationRepeated measures designClinical trialIntervention (counseling)Timed Up and Go testBalance (ability)Nursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Locomotive syndrome (LS) is a condition in which muscle weakness and reduced motor function due to musculoskeletal disorders cause reduced mobility and physical function. In Japan, musculoskeletal disorders are the most frequent reason for requiring home support or nursing care, and the prevention and amelioration of LS are thus being emphasized. However, it is difficult for older people to make a habit of exercise therapy, which is the mainstay of LS treatment. We investigated whether digital therapy could (1) lead to behavioral change in older people and (2) prevent or improve LS in older people. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether digital therapeutics (DTx) are useful for the prevention and amelioration of LS in older people, and we assessed the effects of DTx on the participants' exercise awareness and motor function. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, prospective, longitudinal, nonrandomized, single-group study of Japanese adults aged ≥40 years who were eligible for LS checks. Each participant underwent an 8-week locomotion training (LT) intervention, and their subjective and objective motor abilities and motor awareness were objectively assessed at the following time points: baseline (before the start of the DTx), interim (4 weeks after the start of the DTx), and end (8 weeks after the start of the DTx). We evaluated the participants' objective motor function using the timed up and go (TUG) test, and we compare the results using a 3-way ANOVA with the TUG test at the 3 evaluation time points as the dependent variable. The results of the 25-question Geriatric Locomotive Function Scale, which is a subjective measure of motor function, and the results of the Behavioural Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire 3, which assesses motor awareness, were also evaluated using an ANOVA in the same way as the TUG test. The significance level was set at .05 / 3 = .0167 after Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: As of April 2025, this study had enrolled 47 participants, and complete data had been gathered from 45 participants for the proposed analysis. Study participation was ongoing as of April 2025. CONCLUSIONS: The study cohort will be used as a basis for further observational and intervention studies. This research could lead to more efficient use of medical resources and a reduction in financial and medical burdens on individuals and the economy, and it could support the prevention and amelioration of LS and the establishment of exercise habits among older people. TRIAL REGISTRATION: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000053922; https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000061550. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/70163.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0570.010

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 head0.257
GPT teacher head0.579
Teacher spread0.322 · 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
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→