MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2273699989

THE PHYSIOLOGICAL AND PSYCHOSOCIAL EFFECTS OF A 16-WEEK COMBINED AEROBIC AND RESISTANCE EXERCISE PROGRAM IN MEN RECEIVING ANDROGEN DEPRIVATION THERAPY FOR PROSTATE CANCER

2011· article· en· W2273699989 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robyn M. Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate cancerAndrogen deprivation therapyPsychosocialResistance trainingAerobic exerciseMedicinePhysical therapyPhysical activityGerontologyCancerOncologyInternal medicinePsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Men who receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer\n(PCa) are at risk of several adverse effects that can be detrimental to both their physical\nand mental health. Common adverse effects include weight gain, muscle wasting,\ncardiovascular morbidity, fatigue and impaired quality of life (QOL). This study tested\nwhether a combined aerobic and resistance exercise program can alleviate some of these\nsymptoms in men receiving ADT.\nDesign: Men with PCa, aged 50-80 years, receiving ADT were recruited to participate in\nthis prospective randomized controlled trial. Subjects were assigned to a usual care\ngroup (UCG) or an exercise intervention group (EIG). The EIG completed a 16 week\ncombined aerobic and resistance exercise program. Outcomes measures were assessed at\nbaseline, 16 weeks, and 24 weeks and included: cardio-respiratory fitness; muscle\nstrength and endurance; body composition; and reports of QOL, fatigue, mood, partner\nrelations, and exercise behaviour.\nResults: Fifteen men were recruited to this study, but two participants in the EIG did not\nfinish the study leaving the EIG with an n = 6 and the UCG with an n = 7. The exercise\nprogram did not lead to changes in weight, BMI or body fat. There was a small, close to\nsignificant, increase in muscle mass in the EIG over the intervention period (p = 0.052).\nThis is encouraging as it demonstrates that exercise can counteract the catabolic effects of\nADT. Interestingly, cardio-respiratory fitness improved over the course of the study for\nboth groups. Muscular fitness, however, improved only for the EIG. There was a\nsignificant difference in chest press strength (p = 0.041) and leg press strength was\nbordering significance (p = 0.058). Unexpectedly, QOL declined for both groups during\nthe intervention (p = 0.029). Participants in both groups also reported increased levels of\nfatigue from baseline to 24 weeks, although these changes were not significant (p =\n0.586). Mood worsened over the study period for both groups from baseline to 16 weeks,\nbut this increase in anxiety and depression was reduced at the follow-up period. These\nchanges, too, were not significant (p = 0.364). Reports of partner relationships trended\ntowards lower scores from baseline to 16 weeks. The men’s report in both groups and the\nwomen’s report in the EIG improved at the 24 week mark, but women in the UCG\nexperienced further decline. Surprisingly, participants in both groups reported increases\nin exercise behaviour from baseline to 24 weeks. This could account for the lack of\ndifference found in many of the measures. The power of this study was 0.22.\nConclusion: Although this was a small study, it showed that a combined aerobic and\nresistance exercise program can have some positive benefits for men with PCa who are\nreceiving ADT. Larger trials are needed to further examine the role of exercise in\nameliorating the side effects of ADT, particularly in the areas of mood and partner\nrelationships.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)→Same topicCancer survivorship and care→French-language works237,207→