Feasibility of an Interactive Video-Based Training Program for Learning and Reviewing Walking Aid Skills
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility of a trial with a novel interactive video-based mobile application to teach safe walking aid use. To explore the preliminary effect of the novel application on balance confidence, balance, mobility, and endurance. DESIGN: Single-arm, pre-post feasibility study. SETTING: University research laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Adult walking aid users (N=13). INTERVENTIONS: Participants used the novel application's fitting and gait training modules pertaining to their walking aid on 2 occasions (baseline, 2wks). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Trial feasibility indicators were collected for process (recruitment rate, consent rate, and retention rate), resources (duration of each data collection session), management (participant processing time), and safety. At baseline and at 2 weeks, participants completed the Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale, the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), the timed Up and Go (TUG), and the 2-Minute Walk Test (2MWT). RESULTS: Thirteen walking aid users (7 men; mean ± SD age: 55±15y; mean ± SD duration of walking aid use: 2.7±4.0y) participated. Feasibility was attained on 3 of the 6 trial feasibility indicators. Participants achieved statistically significant improvements in balance confidence (ABC; small to medium effect; P<.001) and balance (BBS; small effect; P<.001). Participants did not experience significant changes in mobility (TUG; no effect) or endurance (2MWT; small effect; P=.25). CONCLUSIONS: Based on our criteria, a trial with the novel application may be feasible, with some modifications. Preliminary improvements in clinically relevant outcomes including balance confidence and balance were found. These findings will help inform a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effect of the application on clinical outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".