Evaluating Nutritional Knowledge and Physical Activity in Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancers and Their First Degree Relatives Compared with Non-Relatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cancer is considered as one the preventable and manageable diseases. Promotion of a healthy diet and physical activity should be one of the major priorities of national strategy in cancer prevention. Aim of this study was to evaluate the nutritional knowledge and physical activity in patients with gastrointestinal cancers and their first degree relatives as compared with non-relatives. METHODS: This study was done as case-control study. Patients with gastrointestinal cancers older than 18 years of age who were diagnosed from April 2007 to June 2012 and their first degree relatives and also non-relatives were included. A total of 230 persons composed our studied population. Demographic characteristics, level of nutritional knowledge and physical activity were studied by the use of related standard questionnaires. RESULTS: based on the results of univariate analysis of variance, the mean score of total nutritional knowledge in all domains were more in non-relatives group and was similar in patients and their relatives.About 43.9%, 26.4% & 29.7% of the studied persons had severe, moderate and mild physical activity respectively.On comparing the level of physical activity among 3 groups using chi-square test; patients had the least physical activity than their relatives and also non-relatives. CONCLUSIONS: With respect to the role of inappropriate dietary regimen and lack of physical activity in developmentof gastrointestinal cancers, educational interventions in the field of promoting nutritional knowledge and giving importance to physical activity in general and in high risk individuals specifically seems necessary to prevent cancer.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".