MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4207075077 · doi:10.1007/s10552-021-01539-6

The Alberta moving beyond breast cancer (AMBER) cohort study: baseline description of the full cohort

2022· article· en· W4207075077 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Christine M. Friedenreich, Jeff K. Vallance, Margaret L. McNeely, S. Nicole Culos‐Reed, Charles E. Matthews, Gordon J. Bell, John R. Mackey, Karen Kopciuk, Leanne Dickau, Qinggang Wang, Diane J. Cook, Stephanie Wharton, Jessica McNeil, Charlotte Ryder‐Burbidge, Andria R. Morielli, Kerry S. Courneya

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Causes & Control · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of CalgaryAthabasca UniversityAlberta Health Services
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta InnovatesCanada Research ChairsAlberta Cancer Foundation
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerCardiorespiratory fitnessCohortOverweightProspective cohort studyCohort studyCancerMetabolic equivalentInternal medicinePhysical therapyAerobic exerciseBody mass indexPhysical activity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose The Alberta Moving Beyond B r east Cancer (AMBER) Study is an ongoing prospective cohort study investigating how direct measures of physical activity (PA), sedentary behavior (SB), and health-related fitness (HRF) are associated with survival after breast cancer. Methods Women in Alberta with newly diagnosed stage I (≥ T1c) to IIIc breast cancer were recruited between 2012 and 2019. Baseline assessments were completed within 90 days of surgery. Measurements included accelerometers to measure PA and SB; a graded treadmill test with gas exchange analysis to measure cardiorespiratory fitness (VO 2peak ); upper and lower body muscular strength and endurance; dual-X-ray absorptiometry to measure body composition; and questionnaires to measure self-reported PA and SB. Results At baseline, the 1528 participants’ mean age was 56 ± 11 years, 59% were post-menopausal, 62% had overweight/obesity, and 55% were diagnosed with stage II or III disease. Based on device measurements, study participants spent 8.9 ± 1.7 h/day sedentary, 4.4 ± 1.2 h/day in light-intensity activity, 0.9 ± 0.5 h/day in moderate-intensity activity, and 0.2 ± 0.2 h/day in vigorous-intensity activity. For those participants who reached VO 2peak , the average aerobic fitness level was 26.6 ± 6 ml/kg/min. Average body fat was 43 ± 7.1%. Conclusion We have established a unique cohort of breast cancer survivors with a wealth of data on PA, SB, and HRF obtained through both direct and self-reported measurements. Study participants are being followed for at least ten years to assess all outcomes after breast cancer. These data will inform clinical and public health guidelines on PA, SB, and HRF for improving breast cancer outcomes.

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 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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Causes & ControlSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207