An Evaluation of the Behaviour-Change Techniques Used on Canadian Cancer Centre Web Sites to Support Physical Activity Behaviour for Breast Cancer Survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cancer centre Web sites can be a useful tool for distributing information about the benefits of physical activity for breast cancer (bca) survivors, and they hold potential for supporting health behaviour change. However, the extent to which cancer centre Web sites use evidence-based behaviour change techniques to foster physical activity behaviour among bca survivors is currently unknown. The aim of our study was to evaluate the presentation of behaviour-change techniques on Canadian cancer centre Web sites to promote physical activity behaviour for bca survivors. Methods: All Canadian cancer centre Web sites (n = 39) were evaluated by two raters using the Coventry, Aberdeen, and London–Refined (calo-re) taxonomy of behaviour change techniques and the eEurope 2002 Quality Criteria for Health Related Websites. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Results: The most common behaviour change techniques used on Web sites were providing information about consequences in general (80%), suggesting goal-setting behaviour (56%), and planning social support or social change (46%). Overall, Canadian cancer centre Web sites presented an average of M = 6.31 behaviour change techniques (of 40 that were coded) to help bca survivors increase their physical activity behaviour. Evidence of quality factors ranged from 90% (sites that provided evidence of readability) to 0% (sites that provided an editorial policy). Conclusions: Our results provide preliminary evidence that, of 40 behaviour-change techniques that were coded, fewer than 20% were used to promote physical activity behaviour to bca survivors on cancer centre Web sites, and that the most effective techniques were inconsistently used. On cancer centre Web sites, health promotion specialists could focus on emphasizing knowledge mobilization efforts using available research into behaviour-change techniques to help bca survivors increase their physical activity.
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 | 0.015 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".