MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Physical performance limitations and participation restrictions among cancer survivors: A population-based study from NHANES data 2015-2018.

2022· article· en· W4281751565 on OpenAlexaff
Samantha Myers, Emily R. Finch, Kirsten K. Ness, Kristin L. Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNational Health and Nutrition Examination SurveyPopulationCancerDemographyLogistic regressionGerontologyOddsOdds ratioCancer registryEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

12096 Background: Anti-cancer therapies have improved survival outcomes in cancer survivors; however, therapy-related toxicities may impact organ structure and function and interfere with physical performance and participation in life roles. This analysis aimed to estimate the prevalence of physical performance limitations (PL) and participation restrictions (PR) among recent (< 5 years since diagnosis), and long-term (≥ 5 years) cancer survivors. Methods: Data from the 2015-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression, accounting for age, sex, race, and income, and incorporating survey sampling methodology. Odds ratios compared proportions of PL and PR among 663 (weighted population estimate 14,319,219) recent and 341 (weighted population estimate 7,261,088) long-term survivors, and 10,284 (weighted population estimate 215,042,155) persons with no reported cancer history. Two-sided two sample z-tests were used to compare proportions to a previous publication of data from 1999-2002 NHANES data. Results: Physical performance limitations were 1.5-1.7 times (63% vs 29%) and PR 1.5-1.6 times (38% vs 18%) more prevalent in cancer survivors than in those with no cancer history. Long-term cancer diagnosis was associated with increased prevalence of PL and PR, particularly in survivors aged 20-39 years. Proportions increased by 7% for PL and by 10% for PR compared to 1999-2002 values (p-values <0.001). Conclusions: Over 60% of cancer survivors reported PL and nearly 40% reported PR. Despite an interim increase in evidence of the benefits of exercise to manage therapy-related toxicities, these values are a significant increase when compared to 1999-2002 NHANES data. Targeted education for providers and exercise interventions aimed to improve physical function and performance in early cancer survivors should be considered to address the physical sequelae from anti-cancer therapies. [Table: see text]

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)0.003
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.275
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCancer survivorship and care→French-language works237,207→