A Remotely Delivered, Peer-Led Physical Activity Intervention for Younger Breast Cancer Survivors (Pink Body Spirit): Protocol for a Feasibility Study and Mixed Methods Process Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Younger breast cancer survivors consistently report a greater impact of their cancer experience on quality of life compared with older survivors, including higher rates of body image disturbances, sexual dysfunction, and fatigue. One potential strategy to improve quality of life is through physical activity, but this has been understudied in younger breast cancer survivors, who often decrease their activity during and after cancer treatment. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to explore the feasibility and acceptability of a technology-based, remotely delivered, peer-led physical activity intervention for younger breast cancer survivors. We will also assess the preliminary impact of the intervention on changes in physical activity and multiple aspects of quality of life. METHODS: This study is a community-academic partnership between University of California, San Diego and Haus of Volta, a nonprofit organization that promotes positive self-image in younger breast cancer survivors. This ongoing pilot study aims to recruit 30 younger breast cancer survivors across the United States (<55 years old, >6 months post primary cancer treatment, self-report <60 min of moderate-to-vigorous-intensity physical activity [MVPA]) into a 3-month peer-delivered, fully remote exercise program. Participants will complete 6 biweekly video chat sessions with a trained peer mentor, a fellow younger breast cancer survivor. Participants will receive a Fitbit Charge 3; weekly feedback on Fitbit data from their peer mentor; and access to a private, in-app Fitbit Community to provide and receive support from other participants and all peer mentors. At baseline, 3 months, and 6 months, participants will complete quality of life questionnaires, and MVPA will be measured using the ActiGraph accelerometer. Feasibility and acceptability will be explored through a mixed methods approach (ie, quantitative questionnaires and qualitative interviews). Intervention delivery and adaptations by peer mentors will be tracked through peer mentor self-evaluations and reflections, review of video-recorded mentoring sessions, and monthly templated reflections by the research team. RESULTS: Recruitment began in September 2019. As of February 2020, the physical activity intervention is ongoing. Final measures are expected to occur in summer 2020. CONCLUSIONS: This study explores the potential for physical activity to improve sexual function, body image, and fatigue, key quality of life issues in younger breast cancer survivors. Using peer mentors extends our reach into the young survivor community. The detailed process evaluation of intervention delivery and adaptations by mentors could inform a future hybrid-effectiveness implementation trial. Finally, remote delivery with commercially available technology could promote broader dissemination. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04064892; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04064892. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/18420.
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 | 0.028 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.006 |
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".