Treatment fidelity in randomized controlled trials of physical rehabilitation in the intensive care unit: A protocol for a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treatment fidelity is the extent to which a treatment protocol is delivered as planned.(1) Knowledge of how precisely a protocol was delivered is important to understand whether an intervention was rigorously tested. Thus, when interpreting intervention effectiveness, treatment fidelity can help distinguish whether an intervention was poorly implemented or ineffective.(2) In a scoping review of 117 intensive care unit (ICU)-based physical rehabilitation intervention studies, fewer than half reported the extent to which the intervention was delivered as planned.(3) Given the limited reporting of intervention delivery, treatment fidelity of ICU physical rehabilitation trials is unclear. The aim of this scoping review is to understand how treatment fidelity is reported in physical rehabilitation trials started in the adult ICU and pediatric ICU. The research question is: to what extent is treatment fidelity reported in ICU physical rehabilitation randomized controlled trials (RCTs)? The primary objective is to: determine the proportion of treatment fidelity components reported in ICU physical rehabilitation RCTs. The secondary objectives are to identify: the proportion of treatment fidelity components reported by (i) randomization group, (ii) intervention type, (iii) treatment fidelity domain, (iv) intervention type and treatment fidelity domain, (v) randomization group and treatment fidelity domain, (vi) if a time trend exists for the proportion of treatment fidelity components reported, and (vii) how each treatment fidelity component was reported among RCTs of physical rehabilitation in the ICU. Support: No funding has been received for this study. Contributions of authors: This protocol was developed by C. Farley (farlec3@mcmaster.ca) in collaboration with Dr. M.E. Kho (guarantor of this document; khome@mcmaster.ca). Dr. A. Newman (newmanan@mcmaster.ca) and Dr. J. Hoogenes (reamja@mcmaster.ca) provided feedback in the development of this protocol. Author Affiliations: School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada (CF, AN, JH, MK); Physiotherapy Department, St. Joseph’s Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada (MK)
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 | 0.055 | 0.303 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".