Social Cognitive Theory and Physical Activity During Breast Cancer Treatment
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To measure the association between physical activity and social cognitive theory constructs during breast cancer treatment. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Midwestern, academic oncology clinic. SAMPLE: 21 primarily Caucasian (90%) female patients with breast cancer undergoing treatment. 76% were > 50 years old; 76% had stage I or II disease. 17 completed the study. METHODS: Survey (structured interview or self-administration), chart audit, pedometer, and seven-day physical activity recall. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Steps per day, energy expenditure, self-efficacy, barriers, partners and role models, prior physical activity counseling, physical activity knowledge, pretreatment physical activity, outcome expectations and values, goals, reinforcement management, and emotional well-being. FINDINGS: A higher average of steps per day was significantly associated with having an exercise role model and higher annual income. A higher daily energy expenditure (kilocalories per kilogram body weight per day) was significantly associated with higher barrier self-efficacy, higher task self-efficacy, having an exercise partner, having an exercise role model, higher physical activity enjoyment, and lower negative value score. CONCLUSIONS: Social cognitive theory may provide a useful framework for understanding physical activity among patients with breast cancer during treatment, but correlation strength varies with physical activity measurement type. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Social cognitive theory and physical activity during breast cancer treatment warrant additional study with larger sample sizes and multivariate analyses. Interventions to increase physical activity among patients with breast cancer may use social cognitive theory and assess theory constructs as potential mediators or moderators in intervention evaluation.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it