MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Comprehensive Healthy Lifestyle Program for Children Receiving Treatment for Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Feasibility and Preliminary Efficacy Data

2013· article· en· W2811419007 on OpenAlexaff
Marilyn Wright, Laura C. Collins, Anne Christie, Katherine Birken, Elizabeth Dettmer, Paul C. Nathan

Bibliographic record

VenueRehabilitation Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health Sciences
FundersPediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America
KeywordsMedicineLymphoblastic LeukemiaBody mass indexPhysical therapyQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyLeukemiaInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was undertaken to evaluate the feasibility of a comprehensive healthy lifestyle program for children receiving treatment for acute lymphoblastic leukemia. A sample of 13 eligible children in the maintenance phase of treatment, ages 4-8, 10 male, enrolled in the study. A tailored lifestyle program involving a series of monthly, individual education sessions was provided for parents and children by an oncologist, physical therapist, dietitian, and behavioural psychologist. Content focused on participation in physical activity, healthy eating habits, and behavioural strategies. A number of pre- and postmeasures addressed a variety of body functions and activities. Delivery of the program and collection of most measurement data were feasible. Parents valued the program and preliminary data analyses showed individual variation and group improvements in ankle range of motion, exercise capacity, gross motor function, mobility, and physical activity as well as maintenance of dietary practices, body mass index, sports participation, and quality of life.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRehabilitation OncologySame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207