Abstract B5: Psychosocial mechanisms for explaining the relationship between physical activity and fatigue in breast cancer survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Fatigue is one of the most commonly reported and enduring symptoms experienced as a result of breast cancer treatment. One important behavior that has been identified as having the potential to reduce breast cancer related fatigue is physical activity. However, few attempts have been made to fully understand this relationship and it is not known whether physical activity directly influences fatigue or operates through other factors. The purpose of this study was to examine the role of psychosocial mechanisms, self-efficacy and depression, as potential pathways from physical activity to fatigue in a cross-sectional sample of breast cancer survivors (N=192). Participants completed measures of health status, physical activity, depression, fatigue, and self-efficacy. Data were analyzed using path analysis within a covariance modeling framework. This model proposed that that physical activity's influence on fatigue is indirect through its direct effect on self-efficacy which, in turn, has both a direct effect on fatigue and an indirect effect through depression. The hypothesized path model provided an excellent fit to the data (Ξ2 = 1.48, df = 2, p =.48; SRMR = 0.02, CFI = 1.00). All of the proposed path coefficients of the hypothesized model were significant. Overall, the model accounted for 45.2% of the variation in fatigue. As a result of the robust relationship between fatigue and depression (β =.51), the analysis was re-run using a depression score which excluded items assessing “somatic and retarded activity” symptoms. The fit of the model was almost identical to the previously described model (Ξ2 = 1.48, df = 2, p =.45; SRMR = 0.03, CFI = 1.00). A final analysis was conducted on the original model to test effects of for demographics (i.e., age, education, employment, income), time since diagnosis, breast cancer stage, current treatment, menopausal status, body mass index, and comorbidities on model fit and path coefficients, as well as the model components themselves. This model also was an excellent fit to the data (Ξ2 = 2.10, df = 2, p =.35; SRMR = 0.01, CFI = 1.00). In general, the magnitude and direction of the hypothesized relationships were unaffected by the inclusion of the covariates in the model. Our findings suggest support for one set of psychosocial pathways from physical activity to fatigue, an important concern in breast cancer survivors. Subsequent work might replicate such associations in other survivor populations and attempt to determine whether model relations change with physical activity interventions, and the extent to which other known correlates of fatigue such as impaired sleep and inflammation can be incorporated into this model. Citation Information: Cancer Prev Res 2010;3(1 Suppl):B5.
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) | 0.000 | 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".