Mindfulness‐based stress reduction and cognitive function among breast cancer survivors: A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Breast cancer (BC) survivors frequently report changes in cognition after chemotherapy. Mindfulness may benefit survivors by mitigating cancer-related cognitive impairment. As part of a larger study investigating the effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) for BC survivors living with neuropathic pain, the authors assessed whether MBSR would have an effect on cognitive outcomes. METHODS: Participants were randomized to an MBSR intervention group (n = 30) or a waitlist control group (n = 30). Cognitive assessments were administered at 3 time points: at baseline, 2 weeks, and 3 months post-MBSR in the intervention group and at equivalent time intervals for the control group. Multilevel models were used to assess whether MBSR significantly improved task performance at each time point. RESULTS: MBSR participants showed a significantly greater reduction in prospective and retrospective memory failures at 2 weeks postintervention. No effects of MBSR were noted for objective assessments. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that MBSR training reduces subjective (but not objective) memory-related impairments in BC survivors who receive treatment with chemotherapy. This study provides insight into a noninvasive intervention to ameliorate memory difficulties in BC survivors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".