MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exercise Counseling and Programming Preferences of Cancer Survivors

2002· article· en· W2100160566 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Practice · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyQuality of life (healthcare)CancerBreast cancerAerobic exerciseExercise intensityInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it