Rationale and protocol of the LEAD 2.0 study: a randomized controlled trial assessing the feasibility of a virtually delivered 6-month exercise and nutrition intervention in older adults with subjective cognitive decline (SCD)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With growing prevalence of dementia worldwide, dementia risk reduction is a key interest of the World Health Organization's Global Dementia Action Plan. Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) is a prominent predictor of future dementia diagnosis. Therefore, people with SCD are an important group for dementia prevention intervention. Exercise and healthy diet are associated with a 30-60% decrease in dementia risk in longitudinal studies. Technological advances yield the potential of trials that deliver lifestyle interventions virtually, reaching people in a wide geographical spread. However, the feasibility of large-scale virtual trials still needs to be established. OBJECTIVE: This trial aims to examine the feasibility of a factorial randomized controlled trial exploring a 6-month virtual, exercise and healthy diet intervention. Secondary objectives will examine whether feasibility outcomes vary by gender or technology access. METHODS: We will recruit 140 older adults (65 + years) with SCD, who will receive a combination of Aerobic and Resistance Exercise (EX) or Stretching and Toning (STRETCH) and either Diet Counseling (DIET) or Brain Health Education (ED). Participants will be randomized to four weekly hours of one of four intervention arms: (1) EX and DIET; (2) EX and ED; (3) STRETCH and DIET; or (4) STRETCH and ED. EX will include moderate intensity aerobic and resistance training. DIET will instruct participants in brain healthy food choices. Assessments will be performed virtually at baseline, 6 months (post-intervention), and 12 months. Feasibility will be measured by recruitment rate, adherence, and retention. DISCUSSION: Established feasibility will set the stage for a definitive trial. Feasibility results will also inform future virtual programs/services. In the long-term, if the interventions are feasible and beneficial, this intervention model could scale up and spread quickly to reach at-risk individuals for the purpose of dementia risk reduction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Lifestyle, Exercise, and Diet (LEAD 2.0) study is registered with the US National Institutes of Health clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT06078748). This report complies with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".