MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130385705 · doi:10.1093/tbm/ibaa127

Development of an evidence-informed recommendation guide to facilitate physical activity counseling between oncology care providers and patients in Canada

2021· article· en· W3130385705 on OpenAlex
Angela J. Fong, Catherine M. Sabiston, Michelle B. Nadler, Jonathan Sussman, Hugh Langley, Rachel M. Holden, Michaela Stokes-Noonan, Jennifer R. Tomasone

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Behavioral Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentrePrincess Margaret Cancer CentreMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCross-cultural psychologyHealth psychologyMedicineFamily medicineNursingPsychologyPublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decision support aids help reduce decision conflict and are reported as acceptable by patients. Currently, an aid from the American College of Sports Medicine exists to help oncology care providers advise, assess, and refer patients to physical activity (PA). However, some limitations include the lack of specific resources and programs for referral, detailed PA, and physical function assessments and not being designed following an international gold standard (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation [AGREE] II). This study aimed to develop a recommendation guide to facilitate PA counseling by assessing the risk for PA-related adverse events and offering a referral to an appropriate recommendation. Recommendation guide development followed AGREE II, and an AGREE methodologist was consulted. Specifically, a stakeholder group of oncology care providers and cancer survivors were engaged to develop the assessment criteria for comorbidities, PA levels, and physical function. Assessment criteria were developed from published PA interventions, consultations with content experts, and targeted web-based searches for cancer-specific PA programs. Feedback on the recommendation guide was solicited from stakeholders and external reviewers with relevant knowledge and clinical experience. Independent AGREE methodologists appraised the development process. The recommendation guide is a five-page document, including a preamble, assessment criteria for absolute contraindications to PA, comorbidities, and PA/functional capacity with a list of appropriate resources. Independent AGREE methodologists rated the development process as strong and recommended the guide for use. The recommendation guide has the potential to facilitate PA counseling between oncology care providers and cancer survivors, thus, potentially impacting PA behavior.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score0.660

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.284 · 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