MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412739059 · doi:10.2196/72318

Effectiveness of Synchronous Telerehabilitation Versus Face-to-Face Physical Therapy in Older Adults Who Are Frail: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2025· article· en· W4412739059 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Igor Cigarroa, Daniel Reyes‐Molina, Felipe Vargas Ríos, Gustavo López-Alarcón, Sergio Jara-Aceituno, Cristóbal Riquelme-Hernández, Rafael Zapata‐Lamana, María Antonia Parra-Rizo

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelerehabilitationPreprintRandomized controlled trialProtocol (science)MedicinePhysical therapyFace-to-faceTelemedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationGerontologyHealth careComputer scienceAlternative medicineWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Older adults who are frail face significant barriers to physical activity, and innovative solutions such as synchronous telerehabilitation (STR) may provide a viable alternative to traditional face-to-face programs. However, less is known about its effectiveness compared to a face-to-face program. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the effectiveness of an STR program versus a face-to-face physical therapy (FPT) program in the primary outcomes (lower body strength and cardiorespiratory fitness) and secondary outcomes (upper limb strength, dynamic balance, static balance, number of steps, functional status, and quality of life) in older adults who are frail. METHODS: In a randomized, blinded, parallel-group controlled trial, all older adults who are frail and aged ≥60 years of both sexes from the Los Angeles Comprehensive Center for Older Adults will be invited to participate. A total of 58 older adults who are frail (aged ≥60 years) meeting the eligibility criteria will be randomly assigned to either an STR group (n=29, 50%) or an FPT group (n=29, 50%). Participants will engage in 1-hour multicomponent exercise sessions twice weekly for 12 weeks. The telerehabilitation group will participate via videoconferencing, supervised remotely by technical staff, while the face-to-face group will attend in-person sessions. Outcomes will include lower limb strength (sit-to-stand test), cardiorespiratory fitness (2-minute step test), upper limb strength (grip strength test), balance (Timed Up and Go, and single-leg stance), quality of life (36-item brief health survey), functional status (functional independence measure), and daily steps (pedometer). RESULTS: Recruitment will be conducted from April to May 2025. The intervention will run from June to August 2025, follow-up assessments will be completed by September 2025, and data analysis will be finalized by December 2025. Manuscript drafting and submission are planned for March 2026. We hypothesize that STR will yield equal or superior improvements in both primary and secondary outcomes compared to FPT in older adults who are frail. CONCLUSIONS: STR is emerging as a viable and effective alternative to in-person physical therapy for older adults with frailty. This approach has the potential to improve physical condition and functional and quality of life indicators, overcoming geographical and logistical barriers and optimizing therapeutic resources. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06784245; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06784245. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/72318.

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)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.009
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0080.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0710.010

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.446 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→