Associations between Exercise and Quality of Life in Bladder Cancer Survivors: A Population-Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exercise has been shown to improve quality of life (QoL) in some cancer survivor groups, but it is unknown if the unique QoL issues faced by bladder cancer survivors are also amenable to an exercise intervention. This study provides the first data examining the association between exercise and QoL in bladder cancer survivors. METHODS: Bladder cancer survivors identified through a provincial cancer registry were mailed a survey that included the Godin Leisure Time Exercise Questionnaire, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bladder (FACT-Bl) scale, and the Fatigue Symptom Inventory. RESULTS: Of the 525 bladder cancer survivors (51% response rate) that completed the survey, 22.3% were meeting public health exercise guidelines in the past month, 16.0% were insufficiently active (i.e., some exercise but less than the guidelines), and 61.7% were completely sedentary. ANOVA indicated a general linear association between meeting guidelines and QoL, with those meeting guidelines reporting more favorable scores than completely sedentary survivors on the FACT-Bl (mean difference, 7.6; 95% confidence interval, 3.6-11.7; P < 0.001), the FACT (P = 0.001), the trial outcome index (P < 0.001), functional well-being (P < 0.001), additional concerns (P = 0.001), sexual functioning (P < 0.001), erectile function (P < 0.001), body image (P < 0.001), and various fatigue indicators (P < 0.05). Adjusting for key medical and demographic factors slightly attenuated the magnitude of the associations but did not alter the substantive conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise is positively associated with QoL in bladder cancer survivors, although few are meeting public health exercise guidelines. Studies testing the causal effects of exercise on QoL issues unique to this population are warranted.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| 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".