MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991183918 · doi:10.1186/1472-6882-13-34

The eCALM Trial-eTherapy for cancer appLying mindfulness: online mindfulness-based cancer recovery program for underserved individuals living with cancer in Alberta: protocol development for a randomized wait-list controlled clinical trial

2013· article· en· W1991183918 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kristin A. Zernicke, Tavis S. Campbell, Michael Speca, Kelley McCabe-Ruff, Steven Flowers, Dale Dirkse, Linda E. Carlson

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta InnovatesAlberta Cancer FoundationAlberta Health Services
KeywordsMedicinePsychosocialRandomized controlled trialMindfulnessDistressClinical trialCancerMindfulness-based stress reductionIntervention (counseling)Physical therapyClinical psychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Elevated stress can exacerbate cancer symptom severity, and after completion of primary cancer treatments, many individuals continue to have significant distress. Mindfulness-Based Cancer Recovery (MBCR) is an 8-week group psychosocial intervention consisting of training in mindfulness meditation and yoga designed to mitigate stress, pain, and chronic illness. Efficacy research shows face-to-face (F2F) MBCR programs have positive benefits for cancer patients; however barriers exist that impede participation in F2F groups. While online MBCR groups are available to the public, none have been evaluated. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: determine whether underserved patients are willing to participate in and complete an online MBCR program. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: determine whether online MBCR will mirror previous efficacy findings from F2F MBCR groups on patient-reported outcomes. METHOD/DESIGN: The study includes cancer patients in Alberta, exhibiting moderate distress, who do not have access to F2F MBCR. Participants will be randomized to either online MBCR, or waiting for the next available group. An anticipated sample size of 64 participants will complete measures online pre and post treatment or waiting period. Feasibility will be tracked through monitoring numbers eligible and participating through each stage of the protocol. DISCUSSION: 47 have completed/completing the intervention. Data suggest it is possible to conduct a randomized waitlist controlled trial of online MBCR to reach underserved cancer survivors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT01476891.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.147
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.325 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Complementary and Alternative MedicineSame topicMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsFrench-language works237,207