Predicting Effective Adaptation to Breast Cancer to Help Women BOUNCE Back: Protocol for a Multicenter Clinical Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite the continued progress of medicine, dealing with breast cancer is becoming a major socioeconomic challenge, particularly due to its increasing incidence. The ability to better manage and adapt to the entire care process depends not only on the type of cancer but also on the patient's sociodemographic and psychological characteristics as well as on the social environment in which a person lives and interacts. Therefore, it is important to understand which factors may contribute to successful adaptation to breast cancer. To our knowledge, no studies have been performed on the combination effect of multiple psychological, biological, and functional variables in predicting the patient's ability to bounce back from a stressful life event, such as a breast cancer diagnosis. Here we describe the study protocol of a multicenter clinical study entitled "Predicting Effective Adaptation to Breast Cancer to Help Women to BOUNCE Back" or, in short, BOUNCE. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to build a quantitative mathematical model of factors associated with the capacity for optimal adjustment to cancer and to study resilience through the cancer continuum in a population of patients with breast cancer. METHODS: A total of 660 women with breast cancer will be recruited from five European cancer centers in Italy, Finland, Israel, and Portugal. Biomedical and psychosocial variables will be collected using the Noona Healthcare platform. Psychosocial, sociodemographic, lifestyle, and clinical variables will be measured every 3 months, starting from presurgery assessment (ie, baseline) to 18 months after surgery. Temporal data mining, time-series prediction, sequence classification methods, clustering time-series data, and temporal association rules will be used to develop the predictive model. RESULTS: The recruitment process stared in January 2019 and ended in November 2021. Preliminary results have been published in a scientific journal and are available for consultation on the BOUNCE project website. Data analysis and dissemination of the study results will be performed in 2022. CONCLUSIONS: This study will develop a predictive model that is able to describe individual resilience and identify different resilience trajectories along the care process. The results will allow the implementation of tailored interventions according to patients' needs, supported by eHealth technologies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05095675; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05095675. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/34564.
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 | 0.034 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.006 |
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".