P05.60. Dragon boat racing: an evaluation of its influence on the health-related quality of life of breast cancer survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A mixed methods sequential explanatory design was used to examine the relationship between dragon boat racing and HRQOL of breast cancer survivors. One hundred women completed on-line surveys at baseline and post-season periods. Four measures from the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) measurement system were employed to measure HRQOL. From the sample, 15 women were selected for an interview at the end of the season to obtain a deeper understanding of the lived experience of dragon boat racing. Statistically significant improvements from early to late season were reported for HRQOL, physical and emotional well-being, breast cancer-specific concerns and cancer-related fatigue. A trend towards significance was reported for functional well-being, with improved social/family and spiritual well-being scores indicated post-season. Qualitative data elaborated on the quantitative findings, greatly enhancing the understanding of how and why dragon boat racing influenced HRQOL of participating breast cancer survivors. Participation in a season of dragon boat racing is associated with improvements in HRQOL, physical and emotional well-being, breast cancer-specific concerns and cancer-related fatigue. Enhanced social/family, functional and spiritual well-being of participating breast cancer survivors was also indicated. These findings contribute to a growing literature supporting the benefits of dragon boat racing, bringing breast cancer survivors another step closer to having a physical activity option that may help them address their HRQOL challenges, while encouraging them to thrive during survivorship.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".