Changes in Objectively Measured Activity Behavior Among Women Undergoing Breast Cancer Treatment: Longitudinal Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Activity behaviors of breast cancer survivors (BCSs) during treatment are unlikely to be at levels sufficient enough to gain health benefits. Previous activity research among BCSs has been mainly posttreatment and generally cross-sectional. This study aimed to determine the prevalence and changes in objectively measured moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), light physical activity (LPA), and sedentary behavior (SED) among BCSs undergoing adjuvant/palliative therapy. Methods: Participants completed baseline surveys and wore accelerometers to measure activity during waking hours during treatment and again 6 months later. Hierarchal linear modeling (HLM) was used to determine changes. Results: In total, 77 BCSs participated. Ninety-one percent provided physical activity (PA) data for 3 or more valid days at baseline (T 1) and 72% at 6 months (T 2); 29% met PA guidelines at T 1 and 41% at T 2. Daily LPA and SED did not change from T 1 to T 2 (133 vs 138 minutes; 595 vs 597 minutes). Controlling for body mass index at the intercept, HLM revealed that MVPA significantly increased from T 1 to T 2 (+5.62; P = .015). Conclusion: An increase in objectively measured total daily MVPA over 6 months was found, at which time, fewer BCSs were currently receiving chemo- or radiotherapy and may theoretically be feeling better. However, fewer T 2 measures may bias and artificially inflate the results. Although total MVPA minutes increased at T 2, less than half BCSs were meeting guidelines and had high amounts of LPA/SED during treatment, with insignificant change over time (71% at T 1; 59% at T 2). Practitioner intervention may help reduce SED while increasing LPA and MVPA behavior among those currently undergoing treatment.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".