Pilot, randomized trial of resistance exercise during radiation therapy for head and neck cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of a randomized trial of resistance exercise in patients with head and neck cancer receiving radiation. METHODS: Fifteen patients with head and neck cancer receiving radiation were randomized to resistance exercise (using resistance bands) or control group. Resistance exercise occurred at the radiation therapy site (weeks 1-6) and home (weeks 7-12). RESULTS: No serious adverse events occurred related to resistance exercise. Medium to large effect size differences favoring resistance exercise versus control group were noted for perceived fatigue at 6 weeks (smaller increase in fatigue for resistance exercise group; 7.4 vs 15.4, effect size [d] = -0.64), quality of life at 6 weeks (-7.0 vs -14.4, d = 0.52), and chair rise time (seconds) at 6 and 12 weeks (-1.6 vs 0.4, d = -.63 and -1.9 vs 0.1, d = -0.60, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Resistance exercise is safe and feasible in patients with head and neck cancer receiving radiation; a definitive trial is warranted.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".