MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412046527 · doi:10.1186/s40814-025-01665-x

Virtual Intervention for Vertebral frActures (VIVA): protocol for a feasibility study of a multicentre randomized controlled trial

2025· article· en· W4412046527 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ali Ibrahim Sevınç, Alexandra Papaioannou, Suzanne N. Morin, Jennifer Watt, Raheem B. Kherani, Sheila Brien, Larry Funnell, Lehana Thabane, Lauren A Beaupré, Jenna C. Gibbs, Heather Keller, Caitlin McArthur, Matteo Ponzano, Sonia Singh, Sharon E. Straus, Jenny Thain, Zachary J. Weston, Timothy H. Wideman, Christopher D. Witiw, Lora Giangregorio

Bibliographic record

VenuePilot and Feasibility Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesCanadian Society for Exercise PhysiologyArthritis Research Centre of CanadaResearch Institute for AgingUniversity of AlbertaSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonResearch CanadaMcGill UniversityDalhousie UniversityHamilton Health SciencesWestern UniversityUniversity of TorontoOsteoporosis CanadaMcMaster UniversityWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BCCanada Research ChairsCraig H. Neilsen Foundation
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialMedicinePhysical therapyRehabilitationPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)RandomizationOsteoporosisSurgeryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Vertebral fractures due to osteoporosis cause significant pain and disability. There is guidance available on the management of osteoporotic vertebral fractures, informed by systematic reviews and a consensus process. However, few studies examine whether implementing pragmatic and patient-oriented rehabilitation interventions can improve outcomes for individuals with a vertebral fracture. METHODS: The purpose of the study is to investigate the feasibility of a multicentre randomized controlled trial of an 8-week virtual rehabilitation intervention for people with an osteoporotic vertebral fracture in Ontario, British Columbia, and Quebec. The design is a multicentre randomized controlled trial with two parallel groups randomized in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by centre to immediate or delayed (10 weeks after randomization) receipt of the Virtual Intervention for Vertebral frActures (VIVA). Four centres will each recruit eight individuals (total n = 32) over the age of 50 who have had at least one vertebral fracture in the past 2 years confirmed by a radiology report. VIVA involves once weekly virtual rehabilitation sessions delivered over 8 weeks by an exercise professional, covering four areas: pain management, safe movement, exercise, and nutrition. Exercise professional provides resources and prescribes exercise therapy for participants to implement outside of the scheduled sessions. The primary feasibility outcomes are recruitment, retention, and adherence, and criteria for success are as follows: (a) recruiting eight people per site in 5 months, (b) 80% of participants completing the trial, and (c) 75% adherence to the virtual rehabilitation sessions. The secondary outcomes include costs relative to benefit, effects on health-related outcomes (e.g. 30-s chair stand, Brief Pain Inventory, Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis-41, SCREEN-14), and outcomes related to implementation (e.g. participant and provider experience using semi-structured interviews, fidelity, number of screened and enrolled participants by referral source, fracture verification process). Descriptive analyses (e.g. mean, count, percentage) will be performed for primary feasibility outcomes and secondary outcomes. DISCUSSION: The results will establish the feasibility of a future trial investigating the effectiveness of the VIVA intervention in people with an osteoporotic vertebral fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on October 21, 2024 (NCT06650410), https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06650410 .

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.142
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePilot and Feasibility StudiesSame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207