Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this dissertation was to identify the key preferences, determinants of physical activity (PA), and sports participation in young adult cancer survivors (YACS) and then use this information to develop a theory-based, PA behavior change intervention. To achieve this aim, my dissertation comprises of three studies. A cross-sectional survey designed to identify the preferences, determinants and sports association to PA in a population-based sample of 588 young adult cancer survivors. The majority of YACS indicated they were able and willing to participate in a program to increase PA, preferred to do PA with others, in their communities and receive information about PA 3-6 months post diagnosis by brochure/print material. The theory of planned behavior (TPB) explained 38% of variance with intention being the strongest independent correlate to PA. Planning, affective attitude, general health, education also had independent contributions. Perceived behavioral control (PBC) was the strongest predictor of intention. Approximately one third (32.5%) of YACS participated in sport in the last month with the most common reported sports: golf, hockey and tennis. Sport participation had a positive correlation to psychosocial variables and quality of life (QoL) scores. Based on these results and directed by the TPB a PA guidebook for YACS was developed and evaluated by experts in TPB, exercise oncology, health informatics, oncology, and YACS. These evaluations directed further changes to the guidebook. This guidebook (TPAG) was compared to the Canadian Physical Activity Guidelines (CPAG) in a randomized control trial of 212 YACS. The TPAG did not increase PA minutes in the overall sample of YACS. Due to the very active sample, a separate analysis was conducted for YACS reporting less than 300 minutes of PA/week. At three months, the TPAG group reported a significant 90 minutes of PA/week more than the CPAG group. As predicted, the TPAG did not affect the TPB variables of the overall sample. The TPAG did however affect affective attitude, PBC and descriptive norms at three month follow up of YACS reporting less than 300 minutes of PA/week. Overall, the results suggest that the TPAG is superior to a generic PA recommendation to the less active YACS.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".