Physical activity interests and preferences of cancer patients with brain metastases: a cross-sectional survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physical activity has been shown to positively impact cancer-related fatigue, physical functioning and quality of life outcomes in early stage cancer patients, however its role at the end stage of cancer has yet to be determined. Brain metastases are amongst the most common neurological complications of advanced cancer, with significant deterioration in fatigue and quality of life. The purpose of the present study was to examine the physical activity interests and preferences of cancer patients with brain metastases initiating palliative whole brain radiotherapy. METHODS: Thirty-one patients aged 18 years or older, cognitively intact, diagnosed with brain metastases, and with Palliative Performance Scale scores of greater than 30%, were recruited from a multidisciplinary outpatient brain metastases clinic. An interviewer-administered survey was used to assess physical activity interests and preferences of participants who were embarking upon palliative whole brain radiotherapy. RESULTS: 87% (n = 27) of participants felt that physical activity was important, however there was limited interest in participating in a structured program at the onset of palliative whole brain radiotherapy. Lung cancer diagnosis was associated with being less interested in participating in a physical activity program, and feeling less able to participate in a physical activity program at the onset of palliative whole brain radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer patients with brain metastases demonstrate limited interest and varied preferences for physical activity during palliative whole brain radiotherapy. Additional pilot work with this patient population is needed before physical activity interventions can be tested in clinical research.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".