Facilitators and barriers to participation in lifestyle modification for men with prostate cancer: A scoping review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Diet and physical activity changes have been shown to improve quality of life and health outcomes for prostate cancer (PC) survivors; however, few survivors make lifestyle changes. We aimed to identify PC-specific facilitators and barriers to dietary and physical activity changes and participation in survivorship-based lifestyle management programmes. METHODS: A scoping review investigating facilitators and barriers of PC survivor's participation in lifestyle management programmes was conducted in June 2018. A total of 454 studies were identified, 45 studies were assessed in full, and 16 were included in the scoping review. RESULTS: Barriers to lifestyle change included perceived lack of evidence for lifestyle guidelines, treatment side effects, perception of change as unnecessary, time pressure and age. Facilitators for lifestyle change included advice from health professionals, support systems (family and peer), diagnosis as a time for change, lifestyle as a coping strategy to manage side effects and improve well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals, peers and family have a significant role in lifestyle management for PC survivors to facilitate engagement. Specific and clear messaging of the benefits of lifestyle management is warranted. Treatment-related side effects, time pressure, current health perception and age should be considered when developing lifestyle management programmes for PC survivors.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it