MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149109421 · doi:10.1158/1055-9965.epi-05-0603

Effect of Physical Activity on Women at Increased Risk of Breast Cancer: Results from the E3N Cohort Study

2006· article· en· W2149109421 on OpenAlexaff
B. Téhard, Christine M. Friedenreich, Jean‐Michel Oppert, Françoise Clavel‐Chapelon

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsAlberta Cancer Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineCohortOncologyCohort studyCancerInternal medicineGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: There is a need to investigate the type, duration, frequency, and intensity of physical activity that are critical to reduce the risk of breast cancer, and if this relation differs among subgroups of women. METHODS: We analyzed the relation between physical activity and breast cancer incidence between 1990 and 2002 (n=3,424 cases), among 90,509 women of the French E3N cohort, ages between 40 and 65 years in 1990. We gave special attention to effect modification by body mass index (BMI), family history of breast cancer, parity, and hormone replacement therapy (HRT). RESULTS: A linear decrease in risk of breast cancer was observed with increasing amounts of moderate (P(trend)<0.01) and vigorous (P(trend)<0.0001) recreational activities. Compared with women who reported no recreational activities, those with more than five weekly hours of vigorous recreational activity had a relative risk of 0.62 (0.49-0.78). This decrease was still observed among women who were overweight, nulliparous, had a family history of breast cancer, or used HRT. Compared with the whole cohort, among nulliparous women, the reduction of risk observed was of a higher magnitude, although the test for heterogeneity did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: A risk reduction of breast cancer was particularly observed with vigorous recreational activity. Further investigations are needed to confirm that intensity is an important variable to consider in risk reduction and to identify the precise biological mechanisms involved in such a risk reduction.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.938

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.349 · 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

Citations166
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & PreventionSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207