A pilot study of an exercise & cognitive behavioral therapy intervention for epithelial ovarian cancer patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer has the highest mortality rate of all gynaecologic cancers. Faced with poor prognoses, stressful treatment effects and a high likelihood of recurrence, survivors must confront significant physical and psychological morbidities that negatively impact health-related quality of life. Frequently reported side effects include cancer-related fatigue, peripheral neuropathy, and psychological distress. Exercise and cognitive behavioral therapy interventions have counteracted such adverse effects in other cancer populations. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility and benefits of a 24-week home-based exercise intervention, coordinated with 12 weeks of cognitive behavioral therapy (two sessions per month), developed for two types of patients diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer: 1) those undergoing primary treatment with adjuvant chemotherapy after primary surgery; 2) those on surveillance after completing treatment within the last 2 years. METHODS: Participants were recruited from the Gynaecologic Oncology Clinic. Eligible participants completed baseline assessments and were provided with home-based exercise equipment. Cognitive behavioral therapy was provided every other week for patients via telephone. Assessments were completed at baseline (T1), 3 months (T2) and 6 months (T3). RESULTS: 19 of the 46 eligible patients approached were enrolled, with 7 patients in the treatment group and 12 in the surveillance group. There was a significant within group increase in peak VO2 from baseline to 6 months: F(2,16) = 5.531, p = 0.015, partial η2 = 0.409. CONCLUSION: The combined 6-month exercise-cognitive behavioral therapy intervention was associated with significant increases in aerobic fitness in epithelial ovarian cancer patients assessed. These improvements were similar regardless of whether the patient was receiving chemotherapy or under surveillance.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".