MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153304858 · doi:10.2196/24254

A Technology-Based Physical Activity Intervention for Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer (Fit2ThriveMB): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2021· article· en· W3153304858 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Siobhan M. Phillips, Payton Solk, Whitney A. Welch, Lisa Auster‐Gussman, Marilyn Lu, Erin Cullather, Emily Torre, Madelyn Whitaker, Emily Izenman, Jennifer La, Jungwha Lee, Bonnie Spring, William J. Gradishar

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineMetastatic breast cancerBreast cancerPsychological interventionQuality of life (healthcare)Randomized controlled trialPopulationmHealthLife expectancyPhysical therapyCancerClinical trialInternal medicineNursingEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Increased incidence and life expectancy have resulted in a growing population of patients with metastatic breast cancer, and these patients experience high rates of morbidity and premature mortality. Increased physical activity (PA) is consistently associated with improved health and disease outcomes among early-stage survivors. However, there is a paucity of research on PA in patients with metastatic breast cancer, and existing PA interventions have exhibited low feasibility because of their focus on intense PA and/or requirement of on-site visits. Mobile health (mHealth)-based PA interventions may be particularly useful for patients with metastatic breast cancer because they allow for remote monitoring, which facilitates individual tailoring of PA recommendations to patients' abilities and may minimize participant burden. However, no studies have examined mHealth PA interventions in patients with metastatic breast cancer. OBJECTIVE: We aim to address these critical research gaps by testing a highly tailored technology-based intervention to promote PA of any intensity (ie, light, moderate, or vigorous) by increasing daily steps in patients with metastatic breast cancer. The primary aim of this study is to test the feasibility and acceptability of the Fit2ThriveMB intervention. We will also examine outcome patterns suggesting the efficacy of Fit2ThriveMB on symptom burden, quality of life, and functional performance. METHODS: The Fit2ThriveMB trial is a two-arm pilot randomized controlled trial that will compare the effects of a smartphone-delivered, home-based PA intervention and an attention-control education condition on PA and quality of life in low-active female patients with metastatic breast cancer. A subsample (n=25) will also complete functional performance measures. This innovative trial will recruit 50 participants who will be randomized into the study's intervention or control arm. The intervention will last 12 weeks. The Fit2ThriveMB intervention consists of a Fitbit, coaching calls, and the Fit2ThriveMB smartphone app that provides self-monitoring, a tailored goal-setting tool, real-time tailored feedback, app notifications, and a group message board. Assessments will occur at baseline and post intervention. RESULTS: The Fit2ThriveMB study is ongoing. Data collection ended in February 2021. CONCLUSIONS: Data from this study will provide the preliminary effect sizes needed to assemble an intervention that is to be evaluated in a fully powered trial. In addition, these data will provide essential evidence to support the feasibility and acceptability of using a technology-based PA promotion intervention, a scalable strategy that could be easily integrated into care, among patients with metastatic breast cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04129346; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04129346. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/24254.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.006
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0090.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0910.014

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.531
Teacher spread0.430 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207