Effects of occupational therapy on quality of life of patients with metastatic prostate cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficiency of occupational therapy relative to a home program in improving quality of life (QoL) among men who were treated for metastatic prostate cancer (MPC). METHODS: Fifty-five men were assigned randomly to either the 12-week cognitive behavioral therapy based occupational therapy (OT-CBSM) intervention (treatment group) or a home program (control group) between March 2012 and August 2014 in the Department of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) was used to measure the occupational performance and identify difficulties in daily living activities. The QoL and symptom status were measured by The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and its Prostate Cancer Module. A 12-week OT-CBSM intervention including client-centered training of daily living activities, recreational group activities, and cognitive behavioral stress management intervention were applied. RESULTS: The COPM performance and satisfaction scores, which indicate occupational participation and QoL increased statistically in the treatment group in relation to men who were included in the home-program (p less than or equal to 0.05). CONCLUSION: A 12-week OT-CBSM intervention was effective in improving QoL in men treated for MPC, and these changes were associated significantly with occupational performance.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".