MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7116913680 · doi:10.1002/alz70860_101878

Health outcomes from a 12‐week healthy body and mind program for people with osteoarthritis and thinking concerns/dementia: A pilot randomised control trial

2025· article· en· W7116913680 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Claire V. Burley, N. Borges, H Brodaty, Belinda Parmenter

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaCognitionOsteoarthritisPublic healthHealthy agingControl (management)Randomized controlled trialQuality of life (healthcare)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) has been reported in approximately1-in-2 older adults and is associated with a 1.5-fold increase in dementia risk. Half of overall disease burden is due to modifiable factors such as physical activity and lifestyle. Currently no programs exist for people living with OA and thinking concerns/dementia. The aims of this pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) are to determine whether a 12-week multidisciplinary Healthy Body & Mind Program improves health outcomes in people living with OA and thinking concerns/dementia. METHOD: Eighteen consenting participants with OA and thinking concerns/dementia (mean age=71.5±5.7years; mean telephone Montreal Cognitive Assessment [MoCA]=18.9±2.1) were randomly allocated to the 12-week program or usual medical care (wait-list control). Outcome measures included quality of life (QoL) [SF-36], pain (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index [WOMAC]), cognition (MoCA and Cambridge Cognition multitasking test [MTT], spatial working memory [SWM] and paired associated learning [PAL]) and psychological health (Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale [DASS-21]). Data were analysed using ANOVAs (intervention/control) and paired t-tests (baseline/follow-up). Cognition data were available for baseline/follow-up only. RESULTS: =0.046). No significant differences were observed for psychological health measures. A clinically meaningful improvement was observed in overall cognition (mean MoCA increased by 1.2 points). T-tests revealed significant improvements in the MTT (including number of incongruent errors (p = .03;d=0.84), mean reaction latency on congruent trials (p = 0.008;d=17.07) and incongruent trials (p = .01;d=5.14), mean multitasking cost (p = 0.009;d=1.80), total correct responses (p = .01;d=3.39) and total errors (p <0.005;d=1.57). No significant differences were observed for SWM or PAL. CONCLUSION: In this pilot 12-week RCT, the Healthy Body & Mind Program improved pain, QoL, and cognition in people living with OA and thinking concerns or dementia. Future research should scale-up and deliver this program to larger populations to identify if such programs have the potential to improve public health and reduce dementia risk at a national level.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→