Back

Preclinical mobility limitation outcomes in rehabilitation interventions for middle-aged and older adults population: a scoping review protocol

Lai, A.; Morgan, A.; Richardson, J.; Griffith, L.; Kuspinar, A.; Smith-Turchyn, J.

2022-10-25 rehabilitation medicine and physical therapy
10.1101/2022.10.22.22280644 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectivesThis scoping review aims to understand the extent of evidence regarding preclinical mobility limitation (PCML) intervention studies that have been implemented or planned in middle-aged and older adult populations. IntroductionIndividuals with PCML are at a high risk of future functional loss and progression to disability. An overview of studies undertaken on this emerging topic is now due. Inclusion criteriaRehabilitation intervention studies that measured PCML outcomes or assessed individuals at the PCML stage will be included. Studies will be considered if the participants are middle-aged (45-64yrs) or older adults ([≥] 65yrs) in any setting, including community-dwelling, hospital discharges, or institutional settings. MethodsSeven databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science and Cochrane CENTRAL) were searched to locate relevant published and unpublished intervention studies (English evidence from inception onwards). The search strategy will be generated using the PCC framework (population, concept, and context) and refined after consulting with a McMaster research librarian. In addition, a manual search from the reference list of retrieved papers and review articles will also be performed. Two reviewers will use predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria to independently review titles, abstracts, and full texts of potential articles. Any disagreements on study selection will be resolved by discussion or consensus involving a third reviewer. Data will be collected and reported using a predefined data extraction chart and described using qualitative content analysis.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.