MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4243198667 · doi:10.31038/cst.2017222

bridging-the-gap-incorporating-exercise-evidence-into-clinical-practice-in-breast-cancer-care-in-ontario-a-pilot-randomized-control-trial-protocol/#

2017· article· en· W4243198667 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jenna Smith‐Turchyn, Julie Richardson, Richard Tozer, Lehana Thabane, Margaret L. McNeely

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Studies and Therapeutics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaJuravinski Cancer CentreMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)Breast cancerRandomized controlled trialMedicineProtocol (science)Physical therapyClinical PracticeCancerAlternative medicineComputer scienceInternal medicineComputer networkPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Breast cancer (BC) and its treatments lead to numerous side effects that affect a person's life for years after treatment has ended.Research shows that regular exercise limits many of these side effects.However, less than 30% of BC survivors regularly exercise due to many barriers at both the patient and health care professional level.The purpose of this pilot trial is to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of conducting a novel KT intervention using exercise and self-management versus usual care among BC survivors.Methods: Study Design: Pilot randomized controlled trial.Eligibility: Women older than 18 years who are currently undergoing chemotherapy treatment for BC.Intervention: The intervention group includes an 8-session multi-component intervention with a structured aerobic exercise program plus SM supervised by a physiotherapist.Randomization: Participants will be randomly allocated using a 1: 1 allocation ratio to receive the intervention of structured exercise plus SM program or usual care.Outcomes: The primary feasibility outcomes include recruitment rate, retention rate, and adherence rate.The secondary outcomes include exercise knowledge and behavior, HRQoL and resource utilization.Analysis: A blinded assessor will assess outcomes at baseline, post intervention, at 2-and 4-month follow up.Intervention feasibility and effectiveness will be assessed using descriptive statistics and analysis of covariance for continuous outcomes.Discussion: This study aims to assess the feasibility of a novel KT intervention to close the current KT gap and increase exercise awareness for women with BC.This project will assess process and resource variables before implementation of a larger scale intervention.The overall project goal is to promote sustainable exercise behaviour to help manage the burden of BC.Trial Registration: This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.003

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Studies and TherapeuticsSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207