“It's About Connections”: A Grounded Theory of Older Adults’ Engagement in Remotely Delivered Home-Based Physical and Cognitive Exercise Interventions Aiming to Reduce the Risk of Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical exercise and cognitive training have the potential to enhance cognitive function and mobility in older adults at risk of dementia. However, little is known about the experience of receiving such interventions in the home settings of older adults. Fifteen participants (mean age 70.8 years) who completed the 16-week interventions of SYNERGIC@Home feasibility trial were interviewed to understand participants’ engagement in home-based physical and cognitive exercise interventions delivered one-on-one through videoconferencing. Grounded theory data analysis was completed collaboratively by qualitative researchers. Results show that participants’ engagement was driven by personal connection to dementia and mediated by relationships fostered largely with individual exercise trainers. Participants were also invested in the greater good (wanting their participation to make a difference to dementia research), their own outcomes, or their family's and society at large. Overall, they reflected on their participation as a rich learning experience. We propose that the quality of interpersonal connections and personalized support are of primary importance for older adults to stay engaged in physical exercise and cognitive training programs delivered remotely. SYNERGIC@Home trial registration number: NCT04997681, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04997681
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".