MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2218930372 · doi:10.1111/jocn.13067

Survivors speak: a qualitative analysis of motivational factors influencing breast cancer survivors’ participation in a sprint distance triathlon

2015· article· en· W2218930372 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Karen M. Robinson, Linda B. Piacentine, Leslie J. Waltke, Alexander V. Ng, Judy A. Tjoe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Nursing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAurora Research Institute
KeywordsThematic analysisFocus groupBreast cancerSurvivorship curveQualitative researchPsychologyQuality of life (healthcare)MedicineCoachingPhonePhysical therapyNursingCancerPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To examine motivational factors influencing breast cancer survivors to participate in triathlon training, complete a triathlon and maintain an exercise thereafter. BACKGROUND: Routine exercise has been shown to improve quality of life and reduce recurrence for breast cancer survivors. Yet physical and psychological factors present barriers for initiating and maintaining an exercise routine. Research is limited in exploring factors of exercise motivation from the survivor's perspective. DESIGN: Qualitative design using focus groups and individual follow-up phone interviews to explore motivation for exercise initiation and maintenance. METHODS: One to two weeks after completing a triathlon, 11 breast cancer survivors who trained together participated in one of three focus groups to discuss their experience. Five months post triathlon 6 of the 11 participants were successfully contacted and phone interviews were conducted to explore exercise maintenance. Focus groups and interviews were analysed using content and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Five themes emerged (1) Champion for Exercise, (2) Part of a Team, (3) Everyone Had a Story, (4) Not Really Exercise and (5) What Do We Do Now? Overall, survivors recognised their need for lifestyle change (e.g. moving from a sedentary lifestyle to a more active one). More importantly, they identified the team approach to exercise initiation was crucial in their success in sustaining a behavioural change. CONCLUSIONS: Emphasis needed on developing team exercise training programmes for survivors. Nurses can play a critical role in discussing with survivors, the benefits of exercise initiation and maintenance. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Breast cancer survivors are hesitant to initiate routine exercise. Training with women who share a common lived experience increases the likelihood of success. Nurses are in a position to encourage breast cancer survivors to participate in group exercise programmes as a way to improve quality of life.

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)0.002
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.371 · 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

Citations20
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical NursingSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207