MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281490471 · doi:10.1016/j.conctc.2022.100925

ACE-Neuro: A tailored exercise oncology program for neuro-oncology patients – Study protocol

2022· article· en· W4281490471 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Julia T. Daun, L Capozzi, Gloria Roldan Urgoiti, Meghan H. McDonough, Jacob C. Easaw, Margaret L. McNeely, George J. Francis, Tanya Williamson, Jessica Danyluk, Emma McLaughlin, Paula A. Ospina, Marie de Guzman Wilding, Lori Radke, Amy Driga, Christine Lesiuk, S. Nicole Culos‐Reed

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary Clinical Trials Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Innovates - Health SolutionsAlberta Cancer Foundation
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyReferralRehabilitationCancerBreast cancerInternal medicineOncologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Patients with primary brain tumours (i.e., neuro-oncology patients) lack access to exercise oncology and wellness resources. The purpose of the Alberta Cancer Exercise - Neuro-Oncology (ACE-Neuro) study is to assess the feasibility of a tailored neuro-oncology exercise program for patients across Alberta, Canada. The primary outcome is to assess the feasibility of ACE-Neuro. The secondary outcome is to examine preliminary effectiveness of ACE-Neuro on patient-reported outcomes and functional fitness. Methods: Neuro-oncology patients with a malignant or benign primary brain tumour that are pre, on, or completed treatment, are >18 years, and able to consent in English are eligible to participate in the study. Following referral from the clinical team to cancer rehabilitation and the study team, participants are triaged to determine their appropriateness for ACE-Neuro and other cancer rehabilitation services (including physiatry, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, and exercise physiology). In ACE-Neuro, participants complete a tailored 12-week exercise program with pre-post assessments of patient-reported outcomes and functional fitness, and objective physical activity tracked across the 12-week program. ACE-Neuro includes individual and group-based exercise sessions, as well as health coaching. Conclusion: We are supporting ACE-Neuro implementation into clinical cancer care, with assessment of needs enabling a tailored exercise prescription.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.007

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 head0.475
GPT teacher head0.573
Teacher spread0.098 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContemporary Clinical Trials CommunicationsSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207