Exercise Counseling and Programming Preferences of Cancer Survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Exercise has emerged as an important quality-of-life intervention for cancer survivors, but exercise motivation is a challenge. The purpose of this study was to provide a comprehensive assessment of the exercise preferences of cancer survivors. DESCRIPTION OF STUDY: A mailed, self-administered survey was completed by 307 survivors of prostate, breast, colorectal, or lung cancer. The survey contained questions on demographic and medical variables, past exercise, and various exercise counseling and programming preferences. RESULTS: For exercise counseling, 84% of participants said they preferred or maybe preferred to receive exercise counseling at some point during their cancer experience. Moreover, 85% preferred to receive exercise counseling face to face, and 77% preferred to receive it from an exercise specialist affiliated with a cancer center. For exercise programming, 98% preferred recreational exercises, 8!% preferred walking, 57% preferred unsupervised exercise (57%), and 56% preferred moderate-intensity exercise. In addition, 48% preferred to exercise in the morning, 44% preferred to exercise alone, 40% preferred to exercise at home, and 32% preferred to start their exercise program before treatment. Chi-square analyses revealed that a small number of exercise preferences were moderated by demographic, medical, and exercise variables. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The results of this study indicate that cancer survivors have unique and varied exercise counseling and programming preferences. Fifty-six percent of cancer survivors preferred to exercise at moderate intensity rather than at high intensity. Moderate-intensity exercise has been shown previously to be relatively safe even for cancer survivors who are advanced in age. The key to success for inactive cancer survivors may be to provide reassurance that exercise is a safe and beneficial modality for cancer survivors and to prescribe an exercise program that builds their confidence by slowly increasing the level of exercise intensity.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".