MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147855563 · doi:10.7314/apjcp.2013.14.11.6465

Health Risk Behavior of Romanian Adults having Relatives with Cancer

2013· article· en· W2147855563 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lucia Maria Lotrean, Roxana Ailoaiei

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRomanianBody mass indexHealth promotionCancerCancer preventionQuarter (Canadian coin)Cancer screeningGerontologyPublic healthNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to assess body features, and alimentary and lifestyle behavior related to cancer prevention among Romanian adults having relatives with cancer. The study was performed in 2010/2011 in an oncological hospital in Cluj-Napoca, Romania. It involved 320 adults who had relatives with cancer. An anonymous questionnaire was filled in by each participants; their weights and heights were measured and body mass index (BMI) was calculated, 56.6% of the participants having a value higher than 24.9. Almost all subjects ate less than 400 g of fruits and vegetables daily and 56% of the participants consumed more than 500 g of red meat weekly. One quarter of the study sample was performing less than 30 minutes of moderate physical activity daily. Some 28.1% of the subjects were smokers. These data call for comprehensive actions to help Romanian cancer patient relatives to respect the recommendations regarding healthy lifestyle promotion and cancer prevention. Health professionals should periodically assess body composition and lifestyle components of adults who have relatives with cancer in order to identify unhealthy behavior and offer them personalized education and counseling.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.542
Threshold uncertainty score0.781

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Pacific Journal of Cancer PreventionSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207