Physical activity preferences of ovarian cancer survivors
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
OBJECTIVE: Regular physical activity is positively associated with quality of life in ovarian cancer survivors, but no data exist on how best to promote activity in this population. This study investigated the interests and preferences of ovarian cancer survivors with regard to physical activity participation. METHODS: A provincial, population-based postal survey of ovarian cancer survivors in Alberta, Canada, was performed including measures of self-reported physical activity, medical and demographic variables, and physical activity preferences. RESULTS: A total of 359 women participated (51.4% response rate). Over half expressed interest in participating in a physical activity program (53.8%), with a further 32.9% maybe interested. The most common preferences were for programs to be home-based (48.9%), start post-treatment (69.5%), and involve walking (62.7%). There were differences in preferences based on demographic, but not medical, factors. CONCLUSION: The majority of ovarian cancer survivors expressed interest in participating in physical activity programs; however, some preferences varied by demographic factors. Designing physical activity interventions according to these preferences may optimize adherence and outcomes in ovarian cancer survivors.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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