MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7116833356 · doi:10.1002/alz70860_102291

The INTErGenerational intervention to Reduce fraIlTY (INTEGRITY) trial

2025· article· en· W7116833356 on OpenAlexaff
Mei Ling Lim, Amy Sparks, Nicole Ee, Sarah Kedwell, Ebony Lewis, Mao Ling Lim, April Mallon, Christina Coleman, Catherine Ho, Amelia Trippas, Rachelle Scott, Craig S. Anderson, Kim Delbaere, Hiroko H. Dodge, Anneke Fitzgerald, Ruth E. Hubbard, Monika Janda, Eva R. Kimonis, Susan Kurrle, K. Rockwood, Stéphanie Ward, Craig L Segaert, Ruth Peters

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)MEDLINERandomized controlled trialPhysical activityData collectionPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Programs which facilitate purposeful intergenerational interactions are promising risk-reduction tools. They can combine strong social engagement alongside cognitive and physical activities targeting executive function, memory and processing speed, moderate intensity movement and balance, themed around key areas e.g. healthy diet to target risk-reduction for dementia and frailty. However, implementing risk-reduction opportunities can be challenging, and sustained benefit likely requires long-term lifestyle change. Intergenerational-practice represents a unique opportunity to deliver a community-embedded social and multidomain approach with additional potential benefits for children. However, there is a lack of clinical trial data on effectiveness, particularly outside the United States METHOD: The INTEGRITY trial is an on-going cluster-randomised wait-list controlled trial in Sydney, Australia, measuring the impact of multidomain intergenerational-practice sessions on reducing frailty in older adults. Secondary endpoints include cognition. The intervention consists of weekly 2-hour sessions conducted in community-based preschools and involving ∼10 older adults and ∼10 preschool children per site over a 20-week program. The unit of randomization is the preschool. Outcome assessments for older adults include cognitive and physical ability, mood, quality of life, social connections, loneliness, sleep and the frailty index. Children are engaged from the local preschool and receive assessments on language and empathy. Process evaluation data to assess feasibility and engagement is also collected. The control group receive the same sessions after a 20-week waitlist period has elapsed RESULT: Recruitment and sessions are underway. Over 550 older adults have expressed interest with 317 progressing to screening. Screen success rates are 81.1%. A total of 237 older adults have been allocated to sites and 9 sites (out of a planned 44) have completed their sessions. Adult withdrawal rates are 25% overall and 13.7% for those who start attending sessions, primarily due to ill health (their own/their family). Child recruitment has been similarly successful. Anecdotal feedback from older adults, parents and preschool educators is highly positive, with several preschools requesting repeat sessions. CONCLUSION: Preliminary findings suggest intergenerational-practice is well received and a feasible way to deliver community-based interventions. Further data will give insight into the potential cognitive, physical and social benefits for older adults and developmental benefits for children.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→