MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410551892 · doi:10.2196/57866

Testing an Innovative Gait Training Program in Immersive Virtual Reality for Healthy Older Adults: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2025· article· en· W4410551892 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nicolas Mascret, Lisa Delbes, Cédric Goulon, Gilles Montagne

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGaitAdaptabilityRandomized controlled trialPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyGait trainingProtocol (science)MedicineTraining (meteorology)Rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Impaired gait adaptability is one of the major causes of falls among older adults owing to inappropriate gait adjustments in cluttered environments. Training programs designed to improve gait adaptability behavior in a systemic approach may prevent falls in older adults. Recently, virtual reality (VR) technology has been prominent as a relevant gait training tool because of its training implementation potential. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to compare the effectiveness of a VR-based gait training program (VR group) for improving gait adaptability behavior and, thus, reducing the risk of falls relative to a conventional training program such as Nordic walking (NW; NW group). We hypothesized that the VR-based gait training program will lead to greater gait adaptability improvements. METHODS: We will be conducting a randomized controlled trial with pretests, posttests, retention tests, and follow-up. In total, 40 healthy independent-living community dwellers (aged between 65 and 80 years) will be allocated, after a general medical examination, to the VR or the NW group for a training program of 6 weeks. Primary outcomes related to gait adaptability capacities (ie, analysis of adjustments made in different locomotor tasks) and acceptance of the VR device (ie, analysis of acceptance) will be assessed before and after the intervention and 1 month after the completion of the training program (retention). A follow-up will be done during the 12 months after the completion of the gait training program. RESULTS: Data collection will begin in September 2025, and the first results are expected in December 2025. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study may demonstrate the relative relevance of a gait training program in VR versus a conventional one for improving gait adaptability behavior in healthy older adults and, thus, prevent the chances of a fall. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/57866.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.007

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 head0.272
GPT teacher head0.623
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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