Depression and functional status in colorectal cancer patients awaiting surgery: Impact of a multimodal prehabilitation program.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Depression and poor functional status (FS) frequently co-occur. Though both predict adverse surgical outcomes, research examining preoperative functional performance (FP; self-reported) and functional capacity (FC; performance-based) measures in depressed cancer patients is lacking. Prehabilitation, a preoperative intervention including exercise, nutrition, and stress-reduction, may improve FC; however, whether depressed patients benefit from this intervention remains unknown. The primary objectives were to (a) assess differences in FP and FC and (b) explore the impact of prehabilitation on FC in individuals with depressive symptoms versus those without. METHOD: A secondary analysis was conducted on 172 colorectal cancer patients enrolled in three studies comparing prehabilitation with a control group (rehabilitation). Measures were collected at 4 weeks pre- and 8 weeks postoperatively. FP, FC, and psychological symptoms were assessed using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, Six-Minute Walk Distance (6MWD), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), respectively. Subjects were divided into three groups according to baseline psychological symptoms: no psychological-symptoms (HADS-N), anxiety-symptoms (HADS-A), or depressive-symptoms (HADS-D). Main objectives were tested using analyses of variance, chi-square tests, and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: At baseline, HADS-D reported lower FP, had shorter 6MWD, and a greater proportion walked ≤ 400 m. Prehabilitation was associated with significant improvements in 6MWD in HADS-D group but not in HADS-N or HADS-A groups. CONCLUSION: Poorer FS was observed in subjects with depressive symptoms, and these subjects benefited most from prehabilitation intervention. Future research could examine whether severity of depression and co-occurrence of anxiety differentially impact FS and whether prehabilitation can improve psychological symptoms and quality of life. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".