Randomized Controlled Trial of a Behavior Change Intervention to Increase Physical Activity and Quality of Life in Prostate Cancer Survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physical activity improves health in prostate cancer survivors; however, participation rates are low. PURPOSE: This study aims to determine the effects of an implementation intention intervention on physical activity and quality of life in prostate cancer survivors. METHODS: Prostate cancer survivors (N = 423) were randomly assigned to a standard physical activity recommendation, a self-administered implementation intention, or a telephone-assisted implementation intention. Physical activity and quality of life were assessed at baseline, 1, and 3 months. RESULTS: Analyses of covariance using multiple imputation showed that physical activity at 1 month increased by 86 min/week in the standard physical activity recommendation group compared with 168 min/week in the self-administered implementation intention group (P = 0.023) and 105 min/week in the telephone-assisted implementation intention group (P = 0.35). CONCLUSIONS: A self-administered implementation intention intervention resulted in a meaningful short-term increase in physical activity. Supplementation with additional intervention strategies and more frequent intervention may improve longer-term exercise.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".