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 Breast 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 (VO2peak); 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 VO2peak, 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.269
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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