MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3023311838 · doi:10.1093/tbm/iby112

Breast cancer survivors’ preferences for social support features in technology-supported physical activity interventions: findings from a mixed methods evaluation

2018· article· en· W3023311838 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Behavioral Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Cancer InstituteRobert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer CenterNorthwestern University
KeywordsPsychological interventionSocial supportThematic analysisPsychologyDescriptive statisticsCoachingPeer supportApplied psychologyClinical psychologyGerontologyMedicineQualitative researchSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Incorporating peer and professional social support features into remotely delivered, technology-supported physical activity interventions may increase their effectiveness. However, very little is known about survivors' preferences for potential social features. This study explored breast cancer survivors' preferences for both traditional (e.g., coaching calls and peer support) and innovative (i.e., message boards and competitions) social support features within remotely delivered, technology-supported physical activity interventions. Survivors [N = 96; Mage = 55.8 (SD = 10.2)] self-reported demographic and disease characteristics and physical activity. A subset (n = 28) completed semistructured phone interviews. Transcribed interviews were evaluated using a thematic content analysis approach and consensus review. Following interviews, the full sample self-reported preferences for social features for remotely delivered physical activity interventions via online questionnaires. Questionnaire data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Four themes emerged from interview data: (a) technology increases social connectedness; (b) interest in professional involvement/support; (c) connecting with similar survivors; and (d) apprehension regarding competitive social features. Quantitative data indicated that most survivors were interested in social features including a coach (77.1 per cent), team (66.7 per cent), and exercise buddy (57.3 per cent). Survivors endorsed sharing their activity data with their team (80.0 per cent) and buddy (76.6 per cent), but opinions were mixed regarding a progress board ranking their activity in relation to other participants' progress. Survivors were interested in using a message board to share strategies to increase activity (74.5 per cent) and motivational comments (73.4 per cent). Social features are of overall interest to breast cancer survivors, yet preferences for specific social support features varied. Engaging survivors in developing and implementing remotely delivered, technology-supported social features may enhance their effectiveness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.344 · 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