MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010284562 · doi:10.1002/hed.23118

Pilot, randomized trial of resistance exercise during radiation therapy for head and neck cancer

2012· article· en· W2010284562 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHead & Neck · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHead and neck cancerRandomized controlled trialRadiation therapyResistance trainingHead and neckCancerAdverse effectQuality of life (healthcare)Internal medicinePhysical therapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.290 · 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