MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922011682 · doi:10.1177/1534735419832360

Physical Therapist–Led Exercise Assessment and Counseling in Integrative Cancer Care: Effects on Patient Self-reported Symptoms and Quality of Life

2019· article· en· W2922011682 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gabriel Lopez, Carol A Eddy, Wenli Liu, Yisheng Li, Minxing Chen, Éduardo Bruera, Lorenzo Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueIntegrative Cancer Therapies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteDuncan Family Institute for Cancer Prevention and Risk Assessment
KeywordsQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapistMedicineCancerPsychotherapistPhysical therapyPsychologyClinical psychologyGerontologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Exercise - contributes to improved treatment-related outcomes. We reviewed characteristics of cancer patients referred for physical therapist-led exercise counseling at a comprehensive cancer center and its effects on self-reported symptoms and quality of life. METHODS: Patients presenting for outpatient exercise counseling from February 2016 to May 2017 completed the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS; 0-10 scale, 10 most severe) pre-encounter/post-encounter and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS10) global health assessment pre-encounter. Counseling included assessment and education. ESAS individual items and subscales of physical distress (PHS), psychological distress, and global distress (GDS) were analyzed. We used paired t-tests to compare (1) ESAS symptoms pre-encounter/post-encounter and (2) ESAS and PROMIS10 scores at baseline (pre-encounter) and first follow-up. RESULTS: Of 350 participants, most were female (77.7%), Caucasian (66.3%), and had breast cancer (43%). Baseline (pre-encounter) symptom scores (frequency; mean) included poor sleep (68.2%; 3.5), poor well-being (67.4%; 3.2), and fatigue (64.7%; 3.1). Comparing pre-encounter/postencounter ESAS outcomes, we observed statistically and clinically significant reduction in GDS (-3.32; SD = 6.52; P < .001). On follow-up, statistically and clinically significant improvements were observed for fatigue (-1.22; P = .01), GDS (-4.81; P = .01), PHS (-3.1; P = .03) and PROMIS10 global health, mental health, and physical health scores (all P <.05). CONCLUSION: Patients presenting for exercise counseling had a low to moderate symptom burden and experienced significant improvement in GDS. Longitudinal evaluation revealed improvement in global health and fatigue. Additional research is needed to learn more about patient selection and timing of exercise counseling.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntegrative Cancer TherapiesSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207