Associations among Physical Activity, Comorbidity, Functional Capacity, Peripheral Muscle Strength and Depression in Breast Cancer Survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical inactivity may an important outcome in the prognosis of breast cancer. Physical activity levels decrease significantly for breast cancer patients following the treatment and remain low after oncology treatment is completed. The aim of this study was to determine physical activity levels and to examine associations among physical activity, comorbidity, functional capacity, peripheral muscle strength, and psychosocial status in breast cancer patients. Forty breast cancer survivors were included in this study. Demographic and clinical characteristics were recorded. Physical activity was assessed with a short form of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). We defined comorbid diseases according to the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Functional capacity was evaluated with a six-minute walk test (6MWT). Peripheral muscle strength was measured for quadriceps femoris muscle with a hand-held dynamometer. Psychosocial status was measured with the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS). Forty percent of patients were inactive. The IPAQ total score was significantly related with quadriceps muscle strength (r=0.492; p<0.001) and HADS depression score (r=0.341; p<0.05). Marked correlations were also observed between IPAQ walking score and quadriceps muscle strength (r=0.449; p<0.001), HADS depression score (r=0.341; p<0.05), and CCI (r=-0.433; p<0.001). The CCI score was also markedly associated with quadriceps muscle strength (r=-0.413; p<0.001). 6MWT distance was not significantly correlated with any of the parameters. Regression analyses revealed that psychosocial status and peripheral muscle strength were significant predictors of physical activity estimated with the IPAQ short form and when combined, they explained 35% of the variance. Comorbidities, peripheral muscle strength and psychosocial status partially explain the variability of physical activity level in breast cancer survivors. These results suggest that physical inactivity contributes to worsening health in breast 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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".