Effect of Acute Exercise on Upper-Limb Volume in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Strenuous upper-extremity activity and/or exercise have traditionally been prescribed for breast cancer survivors with or at risk of developing lymphedema. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of an acute bout of exercise on upper-limb volume and symptoms in breast cancer survivors, with the intent to provide pilot data to guide a subsequent larger study. METHODS: Twenty-three women who regularly participated in dragon-boat racing took part in the study. A single exercise bout was performed at a moderate intensity (rating of perceived exertion: 13-14) for 20 continuous minutes on an arm ergometer. The difference between affected and unaffected limb volume was assessed pre- and post-exercise via measurements of limb circumference at five time points. RESULTS: Although limb volume increased following exercise in both limbs, the difference between the limbs remained stable at each measurement point. Only one participant was found to have an increase in arm-volume difference of >100 ml post intervention, and only four participants reported symptoms of tension and/or heaviness in the affected limb. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that limb volume in breast cancer survivors increases after an acute bout of upper-limb exercise but that, for the majority of women, the response is not different between affected and unaffected limbs. Future research using a larger sample and more sensitive measurement methods are recommended.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".