Feasibility and acceptability of a parallel, two-arm randomized controlled trial to evaluate an online physical activity behavior counseling intervention for young adults diagnosed with cancer: a mixed-methods pilot study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) benefits young adults living with and beyond cancer, yet participation remains low. This pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of a PA behavior counseling intervention for young adults post-cancer treatment and trial methods. METHODS: A mixed-methods, open-label, parallel, two-arm pilot RCT was conducted with young adults recruited nationwide (Canada) by healthcare provider referral or advertising. Eligible participants were 18-39 years (with a first diagnosis of invasive, non-metastatic cancer at age 18-39 years), had completed active treatment for invasive, non-metastatic cancer < 5 years prior, self-reported < 150 min of moderate-to-vigorous intensity PA weekly, were fluent in English, and had access to/computer literacy for videoconferencing technology. Young adults were randomized to receive a 12-week individualized PA behavior counseling intervention delivered via videoconferencing technology by PA counselors or usual care. Informed by self-determination theory, the intervention emphasized autonomy support and applied motivational interviewing. Staff tracked feasibility and acceptability outcomes regarding enrollment, allocation, retention, adherence, and adverse events. Young adults and PA counselors were interviewed post-intervention (T1; primary endpoint) and at trial completion, respectively. Planned efficacy outcomes were assessed using accelerometers and online surveys at baseline (T0), T1, and follow-up (T2; secondary endpoint; 24 weeks post-baseline). RESULTS: Seventy-four young adults were screened for eligibility (recruitment rate ~ 4/month over 18 months); 47 (63.5%) were eligible, of which 42 (89%) consented, completed T0 assessments, and were randomized. Most (75% [15/20]) allocated to receive the intervention completed all sessions. Retention rates were 85.7% (T0 to T1 [36/42]) and 71.4% (T0 to T2 [30/42]). Analyzable data for the primary efficacy outcome (PA behavior) were available for 57.1% (24/42) at T1. Content analysis of interviews with 35 (80.0%) young adults and both (100.0%) PA counselors yielded three themes reflecting factors that positively impacted intervention acceptability and one theme reflecting factors that negatively impacted the trial methods' acceptability, as well as recommendations to optimize the trial methods and intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The trial methods and intervention were largely feasible and acceptable for young adults post-cancer treatment, although modifications are required to optimize recruitment strategies, enhance retention at follow-up, refine the intervention, and reduce missing data. A full-scale RCT to assess the efficacy of the intervention and estimate concomitant costs is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04163042). Registered on November 14, 2019.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,022 | 0,023 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».