Exploring the Feasibility of a Broad-Reach Physical Activity Behavior Change Intervention for Women Receiving Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer: A Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Facilitating healthy levels of physical activity (PA) during chemotherapy is important for the psychosocial and physical health of breast cancer survivors. The primary objective of this feasibility study was to examine the effects of a broad-reach PA behavior change intervention among women with breast cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: Breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (N = 95) were randomly assigned to receive a PA resource kit consisting of tailored print materials and a step pedometer (intervention) or a standard public health PA recommendation (standard recommendation). The primary outcome was daily pedometer steps. Secondary outcomes were self-reported light, moderate, and vigorous intensity PA, total moderate-to-vigorous PA, and sedentary time. Assessments were conducted before and after adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: Attrition was 19% (17 of 95). Intervention patients wore their step pedometer for 85 days (range, 35-144 days; SD = 26.4) for a 95% adherence rate. Analyses of covariance suggested that the intervention was not statistically superior to standard recommendation for daily average pedometer steps (-771; 95% CI = -2024 to 482; P = 0.22), total MVPA minutes (-4; 95% CI = -62 to 570; P = 0.90), or sedentary time (+160; 95% CI = -186 to 506; P = 0.42). CONCLUSION: This broach-reach and low intensive intervention was not more effective for promoting PA in breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy than providing the standard public health guidelines for PA. IMPACT: Achieving physical activity behavior change during adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy may require some level of supervised physical activity or more intensive (e.g., face-to-face, supervised) interventions.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".