Investigating the Perceived Feasibility of Integrative Medicine in a Conventional Oncology Setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A majority of cancer survivors experience debilitating effect(s) related to their cancer diagnosis and treatments across physical, psychological, social, and spiritual domains. Timely and innovative solutions are needed to address the adverse treatment-related effects and often disjointed services that breast cancer patients face. Recent studies suggest that the majority of breast cancer survivors are using complementary and alternative medicine at some point along their cancer trajectory. In recent years, scientists and clinicians have examined the effects of yoga therapy among cancer patients and survivors. The current study examined the perceived feasibility of implementing yoga therapy as a treatment service for breast cancer patients at a large urban cancer center in Canada. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach that included focus groups and self-reported surveys with health care providers (HCPs) and breast cancer patients was used in this research. RESULTS: Overall, results indicated that breast cancer patients and HCPs were supportive and eager for the implementation of a yoga therapy program. Six themes emerged from the analysis of the focus group and the survey data: (1) the availability of resources and accessibility of yoga therapy, (2) the credibility and transparency of yoga therapy, (3) the understanding of yoga therapy, (4) an educational component, (5) the therapeutic context, and (6) the integration of yoga therapy. Specific facilitators and barriers became evident within these themes. CONCLUSIONS: Although enthusiasm for the implementation of an integrative yoga therapy program was apparent among both breast cancer survivors and HCPs, barriers were also identified. The findings of this study are currently being used to inform a large-scale program of research aimed at developing integrative treatment services for breast cancer patients, beginning with yoga therapy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 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".