Non-pharmacological interventions to manage fatigue and psychological stress in children and adolescents with cancer: an integrative review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is the most stressful and prevalent symptom in paediatric oncology patients. This integrative review aimed to identify, analyse and synthesise the evidence of non-pharmacological intervention studies to manage fatigue and psychological stress in a paediatric population with cancer. Eight electronic databases were used for the search: PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, LILACS, EMBASE, SCOPUS, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library. Initially, 273 articles were found; after the exclusion of repeated articles, reading of the titles, abstracts and the full articles, a final sample of nine articles was obtained. The articles were grouped into five categories: physical exercise, healing touch, music therapy, therapeutic massage, nursing interventions and health education. Among the nine studies, six showed statistical significance regarding the fatigue and/or stress levels, showing that the use of the interventions led to symptoms decrease. The most frequently tested intervention was programmed physical exercises. It is suggested that these interventions are complementary to conventional treatment and that their use can indicate an improvement in CRF and psychological stress.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".