Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Background: Improving effectiveness of group exercise counseling for breast cancer survivors is needed. Objective: The objective of this study was to describe clinical observations, with research and translation implications, derived during group exercise counseling for breast cancer survivors. Methods: While implementing group session components of an effective social cognitive theory-based exercise intervention, observations were made through verbal discussion with study staff, review of participant feedback, and prospective journaling by the group facilitator. The intervention has been implemented 11 times (ie, 63 survivors; 66 group sessions). Thematic consistency, application to intervention goals and design, and implications were reconciled between 2 investigators. Results: Breast cancer diagnosis was a strong source of commonality among group participants. Participant age, time since diagnosis, and expectation for group sessions (eg, group support vs health education) hindered group commonality. Barriers unique to the breast cancer experience were infrequent, but people-pleasing behavior was often identified as a barrier to adherence. Feeling at risk for cancer recurrence was a major concern. Some participants required referral for mental health evaluation for preexisting conditions (eg, depression). Although participants easily understood time management, application of other behavioral modification techniques was more difficult. Conclusions: A breast cancer diagnosis alone is not sufficient for commonality among group members. Teaching time management and positive reframing is essential. Protocols for appropriate mental health referrals are needed. Implications for Practice: Our observations will assist group facilitators in enhancing group dynamics and addressing obstacles hindering counseling effectiveness. Moreover, our results suggest hypotheses related to enhancing behavior change in a group setting worthy of future study. Background: Improving effectiveness of group exercise counseling for breast cancer survivors is needed. Objective: The objective of this study was to describe clinical observations, with research and translation implications, derived during group exercise counseling for breast cancer survivors. Methods: While implementing group session components of an effective social cognitive theory-based exercise intervention, observations were made through verbal discussion with study staff, review of participant feedback, and prospective journaling by the group facilitator. The intervention has been implemented 11 times (ie, 63 survivors; 66 group sessions). Thematic consistency, application to intervention goals and design, and implications were reconciled between 2 investigators. Results: Breast cancer diagnosis was a strong source of commonality among group participants. Participant age, time since diagnosis, and expectation for group sessions (eg, group support vs health education) hindered group commonality. Barriers unique to the breast cancer experience were infrequent, but people-pleasing behavior was often identified as a barrier to adherence. Feeling at risk for cancer recurrence was a major concern. Some participants required referral for mental health evaluation for preexisting conditions (eg, depression). Although participants easily understood time management, application of other behavioral modification techniques was more difficult. Conclusions: A breast cancer diagnosis alone is not sufficient for commonality among group members. Teaching time management and positive reframing is essential. Protocols for appropriate mental health referrals are needed. Implications for Practice: Our observations will assist group facilitators in enhancing group dynamics and addressing obstacles hindering counseling effectiveness. Moreover, our results suggest hypotheses related to enhancing behavior change in a group setting worthy of future study.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 0.012 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".