MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415225681 · doi:10.2196/preprints.84902

Assessing the fidelity of implementation of an online tele-coaching community-based exercise intervention among adults living with HIV in Toronto, Ontario Canada (Preprint)

2025· preprint· en· W4415225681 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marfy Abousifein, Soo Chan Carusone, Julia Nathanson, Tizneem Jiancaro, Ada Tang, Puja Ahluwalia, Ahmed M. Bayoumi, Lisa Avery, George Da Silva, Francisco Ibáñez-Carrasco, Ivan Ilić, Kiera McDuff, Mona Loutfy, Zoran Pandovski, Helen Trent, Mehdi Zobeiry, Kelly K. O’Brien

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV-related health complications and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoachingTrainerFidelityIntervention (counseling)Session (web analytics)Observational studyPsychological interventionHealth coaching

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND Community-based exercise (CBE) can prevent and mitigate disability and improve health outcomes in people aging with HIV; however, engagement in exercise can vary. OBJECTIVE This study aims to describe the fidelity of implementation (FOI) of an online telecoaching CBE intervention with adults living with HIV. METHODS We conducted an observational longitudinal study involving a 6-month online CBE intervention involving thrice-weekly 60-minute exercise sessions; online biweekly supervised one-on-one exercise sessions with a personal trainer (13 sessions); and online monthly group educational sessions. We assessed fidelity using (1) online structured interviews with participants living with HIV at months 2 and 6, comprising 20 fidelity items on trainer performance, participant engagement, and exercise experiences; and (2) coaching logs completed by personal trainers after biweekly training sessions (frequency, intensity, time, and type of physical activity during supervised sessions and self-reported physical activity in the prior week). We considered FOI criteria to be met if ≥80% of the participants living with HIV: (1) attended ≥80% of training sessions (11 of 13 sessions); (2) engaged in thrice-weekly exercise the week of the personal training session ≥80% of the time over the 6-month intervention, as reported on the coaching logs; (3) reported “complete criteria met” for ≥80% of the fidelity items (≥16 of 20 items) at month 2 and month 6, as reported from the interviews; and (4) engaged in a combination of aerobic, strength, balance, and flexibility exercise ≥80% of the time over the 6-month intervention, as reported in the coaching logs. RESULTS A total of 29 of 32 participants completed at least 1 fidelity interview; 69% (22/32) were male. FOI was met for 1 of our 4 criteria among the 18 participants who completed the intervention and FOI assessment at month 6, specifically criterion 1, whereby 83% (15/18; 95% CI 66%-100%) of participants attended ≥80% of the 13 coaching sessions. For criterion 2, 50% (9/18; 95% CI 27%-73%) of participants engaged in thrice-weekly exercise in the week of the personal training session ≥80% of the time over the 6-month intervention; criterion 3: ≥80% of participants reported criteria as “completely met” for 70% (14/20 items; 95% CI 50%-89%) of items at month 2 (n=27 participants) and 30% (6/20 items; 95% CI 10%-50%) of items at month 6 (n=18 participants); and criterion 4: 22% (4/18; 95% CI 3%-41%) of participants engaged in a combination of all 4 exercise types ≥80% of the time. Barriers to engagement included scheduling issues, lack of interest, technology problems, and episodic disability. CONCLUSIONS FOI was achieved for supervised components of the CBE intervention and less so with independent exercise. Health and rehabilitation providers should tailor exercise interventions to personal preferences and abilities to improve engagement among adults living with HIV.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designObservational
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHIV-related health complications and treatments→French-language works237,207→