Kinesiologist-delivered mobilization to mitigate inpatient frailty: A study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hospitalized older adults spend excessive amounts of time in sedentary postures (sitting/lying while awake). Mobilizing patients may prevent physical deconditioning, exacerbated frailty levels, and worsened hospital outcomes. The purpose of this study will be to test the hypothesis that compared to usual care, patients who receive multiple kinesiologist visits each day will, 1) increase their step counts and upright time, 2) decrease their frailty levels from admission to discharge, and 3) have shorter lengths of stays and decreased readmission rates. METHODS: Sixty middle-aged-to-older adult patients (≥50 years) from a general/internal medicine unit will be randomized into a usual care control (visit from the kinesiologist once/day) or intervention group (multiple visits from the kinesiologist/day). Kinesiologist visits will include individualized patient mobilization. All participants will be equipped with three waterproofed activPAL inclinometers positioned on their thigh, torso, and shin for 24-h/day throughout hospitalization to measure physical activity (step counts, physical activity intensity), upright postures, and detailed sedentary postures (bent-legged sitting, straight-legged sitting, lying). Frailty will be assessed via a validated 65-item index and the Clinical Frailty Scale two weeks before admission (retrospectively), at admission, and at discharge. Secondary measures will include length of stay and hospital re-admissions. Mixed models for repeated measures will determine whether daily activity differed between groups, changed throughout hospital stay, and effected frailty levels. DISCUSSION: This randomized controlled trial will aim to refine mobilization strategies and individualize interventions for the prevention of decline in mobility and worsening frailty among hospitalized patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol has been registered at clinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT06802289).
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 | 0.038 | 0.274 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| 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; 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".