Cited by 19Multiple Sclerosis Research StudiesTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationPhysical Activity and Health

Lifestyle, Exercise and Activity Package for People living with Progressive Multiple Sclerosis (LEAP-MS): adaptions during the COVID-19 pandemic and remote delivery for improved efficiency

Open access
Lowe, Rachel, Barlow, Christy, Lloyd, Barry, Latchem-Hastings, Julie, Poile, Vincent, Scoble, Charlotte, Dean-Young, Andrew, Button, Kate +2 more·2021·Trials

Abstract

The LEAP-MS (Lifestyle, Exercise and Activity Package for People living with Progressive Multiple Sclerosis) study has developed an individualised supported self-management approach for physical activity for people with progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) and severe disability. The intervention has been evaluated in a single-arm feasibility study with embedded process evaluation. The feasibility study was due to open to recruitment during the COVID-19 2020–2021 pandemic, 1 month into the first UK-wide lockdown. We worked rapidly to implement adaptions to the trial procedures and intervention delivery that we believe are applicable to randomised controlled trials. Recruitment became predominantly via self-referral. Electronic consent was employed, with consent discussions occurring over the telephone. Registration, consent, eligibility assessment and data collection as well as the intervention (online physical activity tool) were via a secure, encrypted multi-user web-based platform for participants, physiotherapists and researchers accessible via various hardware. Physiotherapy consultations, as well as the process evaluation, were conducted remotely using video conferencing software or the telephone. A remote training package for physiotherapists and site initiations was also developed and electronic site files employed. Our adaptions are extremely topical given the COVID-19 situation, and whilst not what we had originally planned, have enabled successful delivery of the feasibility study and are relevant to conducting randomised controlled trials and meeting the needs of people with MS who are far more isolated than ever before. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03951181 . Registered on 15 May 2019.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13063-021-05245-1

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The conduct of RCTs has changed with the increase in remote working, with study documentation such as the trial master file and investigator site files now often being electronic.

    “The conduct of RCTs has changed with the increase in remote working, with study documentation such as the trial master file and investigator site files now often being electronic [82].”

    From Blinding outcome assessors in randomised controlled trials of psychological interventions: how is it done? A narrative review (2026) · cites this paper as [82]

    The Revised feasibility study protocol (Data collection and management) says LEAP-MS used electronic study master and investigator site files, and the Discussion confirms electronic trial master and site files. But LEAP-MS was a single-arm feasibility study; these passages do not establish that such files are now often electronic across RCTs. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lowe, R., Barlow, C., Lloyd, B., Latchem-Hastings, J., Poile, V., Scoble, C., Dean-Young, A., Button, K., Playle, R., & Busse, M.
Affiliations
Cardiff University (GB)
Corresponding author
Busse, Monica
Venue
Trials
Published
2021-04-16
Volume
22
Issue
1
Pages
286-286
ISSN
1745-6215 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3155833508
Cited by
19
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 5
FWCI
3.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trials (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Multiple Sclerosis Society (81)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
Keywords
progressive multiple sclerosis, self-management support, physical activity, exercise intervention, remote intervention delivery, COVID-19 pandemic, feasibility study, physiotherapy, web platform, electronic consent, severe disabilities
MeSH terms
COVID-19, Humans, Life Style, Multiple Sclerosis, Research Design, Self Care, Exercise, Telemedicine, Patient Selection, Disease Management, Videoconferencing, Pandemics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review