Effects of supervised high-intensity interval training on motivational outcomes in men with prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance: results from a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Understanding the motivational effects of supervised aerobic high-intensity interval training (HIIT) may help men with prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance initiate and maintain exercise behavior, however, few studies have addressed this question. This report explored exercise motivation in men with prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance participating in a randomized exercise trial. METHODS: The Exercise during Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer (ERASE) trial randomized 52 men with prostate cancer on active surveillance to the HIIT exercise group or the usual care (UC) group. The exercise program was supervised aerobic HIIT conducted three times per week for 12 weeks. The motivation questions were developed using the Theory of Planned Behavior and included motivational constructs, anticipated and experienced outcomes, and barriers to HIIT during active surveillance. RESULTS: The HIIT group attended 96% of the planned exercise sessions with 100% compliance to the exercise protocol. Motivation outcome data were obtained in 25/26 (96%) participants in the HIIT group and 25/26 (96%) participants in the UC group. At baseline, study participants were generally motivated to perform HIIT. After the intervention, the HIIT group reported that HIIT was even more enjoyable (p < 0.001; d = 1.38), more motivating (p = 0.001; d = 0.89), more controllable (p < 0.001; d = 0.85), and instilled more confidence (p = 0.004; d = 0.66) than they had anticipated. Moreover, compared to UC, HIIT participants reported significantly higher perceived control (p = 0.006; d = 0.68) and a more specific plan (p = 0.032; d = 0.67) for performing HIIT over the next 6 months. No significant differences were found in anticipated versus experienced outcomes. Exercise barriers were minimal, however, the most often reported barriers included pain or soreness (56%), traveling to the fitness center (40%), and being too busy and having limited time (36%). CONCLUSION: Men with prostate cancer on active surveillance were largely motivated and expected significant benefits from a supervised HIIT program. Moreover, the men assigned to the HIIT program experienced few barriers and achieved high adherence, which further improved their motivation. Future research is needed to understand long-term exercise motivation and behavior change in this setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03203460 . Registered on June 29, 2017.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.005 | 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".