MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2600168372

The prevalence of physical activity information for breast cancer stakeholders on Canadian cancer websites

2016· article· en· W2600168372 on OpenAlexaffabout
Karly R Zammit, Benjamin D. Sylvester, Catherine M. Sabiston

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Exercise, Movement, and Sport · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerCancerMedicineThe InternetPhysical activityFamily medicinePhysical therapyWorld Wide WebComputer scienceInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An increasing number of individuals have become reliant on the internet to obtain health/ disease related information. Online breast cancer center websites may be a useful tool for distributing information on the benefits of physical activity in relation to breast cancer, and can serve to assist breast cancer patients to make positive changes to physical activity behaviour. To date, the physical activity information on accessible websites affiliated with prominent cancer centers in Canada has not been evaluated. The aim of this study is to describe and evaluate the physical activity content and information provided on cancer center websites, which were selected if a radiology department was present. The websites (n=24) were evaluated by two raters based on the eEurope 2002: Quality Criteria for Health related websites and CALO-RE taxonomy of behaviour change techniques (BCTs). Inter-rater reliability for evaluation of websites was 87%. Cancer center websites contained an average of 6.88 BCTs. Overall, the majority of cancer center websites (n= 21) offered some form of physical activity information. The most frequently published BCTs included; provide information about consequences in general (92%), goal setting (50%) and set graded tasks (50%). Based on these findings, Canadian cancer center websites should be improved for information content to help breast cancer patients and clinicians understand the well-known benefits of physical activity and offer strategies for improving healthy participation. These results provide preliminary evidence that knowledge translation efforts should be emphasized to help the nearly 90% of breast cancer survivors who are currently inactive.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.341 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Exercise, Movement, and SportSame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207