↓ Skip to main content

Chair based exercise in community settings: a cluster randomised feasibility study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
24 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Chair based exercise in community settings: a cluster randomised feasibility study
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12877-018-0769-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

K. R. Robinson, A. L. Long, P. Leighton, S. Armstrong, R. Pulikottill-Jacob, J. R. F. Gladman, A. L. Gordon, P. Logan, K. A. Anthony, R. H. Harwood, P. E. Blackshaw, T. Masud

Abstract

Some older people who find standard exercise programmes too strenuous may be encouraged to exercise while remaining seated - chair based exercises (CBE). We previously developed a consensus CBE programme (CCBE) following a modified Delphi process. We firstly needed to test the feasibility and acceptability of this treatment approach and explore how best to evaluate it before undertaking a definitive trial. A feasibility study with a cluster randomised controlled trial component was undertaken to 1. Examine the acceptability, feasibility and tolerability of the intervention and 2. Assess the feasibility of running a trial across 12 community settings (4 day centres, 4 care homes, 4 community groups). Centres were randomised to either CCBE, group reminiscence or usual care. Outcomes were collected to assess the feasibility of the trial parameters: level of recruitment interest and eligibility, randomisation, adverse events, retention, completion of health outcomes, missing data and delivery of the CCBE. Semi- structured interviews were conducted with participants and care staff following the intervention to explore acceptability. 48% (89 out of 184 contacted) of eligible centres were interested in participating with 12 recruited purposively. 73% (94) of the 128 older people screened consented to take part with 83 older people then randomised following mobility testing. Recruitment required greater staffing levels and resources due to 49% of participants requiring a consultee declaration. There was a high dropout rate (40%) primarily due to participants no longer attending the centres. The CCBE intervention was delivered once a week in day centres and community groups and twice a week in care homes. Older people and care staff found the CCBE intervention largely acceptable. There was a good level of interest from centres and older people and the CCBE intervention was largely welcomed. The trial design and governance procedures would need to be revised to maximise recruitment and retention. If the motivation for a future trial is physical health then this study has identified that further work to develop the CCBE delivery model is warranted to ensure it can be delivered at a frequency to elicit physiological change. If the motivation for a future trial is psychological outcomes then this study has identified that the current delivery model is feasible. ISRCTN27271501 . Date registered: 30/01/2018.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 124 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 16%
Student > Bachelor 16 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Researcher 6 5%
Professor 4 3%
Other 18 15%
Unknown 52 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 23 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 12%
Sports and Recreations 9 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Social Sciences 3 2%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 59 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 June 2020.
All research outputs
#2,566,115
of 25,402,889 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#663
of 3,649 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,783
of 343,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#23
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,402,889 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,649 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 343,121 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.