Experiences with Weight Change in African-American Breast 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
Although weight gain is a common side effect of breast cancer treatment, limited empirical data are available on how African-American breast cancer survivors react to changes in their weight following diagnosis and treatment. The purpose of this study was to explore psychological and behavioral reactions to weight change in African-American breast cancer survivors. We conducted a qualitative study to explore reactions to weight change following diagnosis and treatment in 34 African-American breast cancer survivors. Forty-seven percent of women reported gaining weight, 32% reported weight loss, and 21% reported no changes in their weight. Regardless of whether women gained or lost weight, these changes were viewed as stressors that caused psychological distress and health concerns. However, some women had positive reactions to weight loss, especially if they had been heavy prior to diagnosis. Women exercised and changed their dietary behaviors following treatment. Despite this, women reported being frustrated with not being able to control changes in their weight. These results suggest that changes in weight may be a critical component of breast cancer survivorship in African-American women. It may be important to provide African-American breast cancer survivors with information about the causes and implications of weight change and strategies for weight control after treatment as part of their follow-up care.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it