MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312371872 · doi:10.2196/41101

Prehabilitation Before Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery: Protocol for an Implementation Study

2022· article· en· W4312371872 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kristy-Lee Raso, Michael Suen, Jane Turner, Sonia Khatri, Yanlan Lin, Carolyn Wildbore, Guillermo Becerril-Martínez, Philip A. Le Page, Sim Yee Tan, Sam Egger, Janette L. Vardy

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEnhanced Recovery After Surgery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrehabilitationMedicineGastrointestinal cancerPsychological interventionPhysical therapyColorectal cancerTelehealthPerioperativeRandomized controlled trialProtocol (science)Intervention (counseling)CancerNursingHealth careSurgeryTelemedicineInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Surgery remains the standard curative treatment for early-stage colorectal and upper gastrointestinal cancer. Reduced preoperative functional capacity, nutritional status, and psychological well-being are associated with poor postoperative outcomes. Prehabilitation aims to improve preoperative functional reserves through physical, nutritional, and psychological interventions. Yet, how it transitions from a trial setting to being integrated into a real-world health setting is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim is to evaluate the implementation of a multimodal (supervised exercise, nutrition, and nursing support) prehabilitation program into standard care for patients with gastrointestinal cancer (colorectal and upper gastrointestinal cancer) scheduled for curative intent surgery. The secondary aim is to determine the impact of a multimodal prehabilitation program on functional capacity, nutritional and psychological status, and surgical outcomes. METHODS: This is an implementation study that will investigate a multimodal prehabilitation intervention, in a nonblinded, nonrandomized, single-group, pre-post design. Patients diagnosed with colorectal and upper gastrointestinal cancer scheduled for potentially curative intent surgery at Concord Repatriation General Hospital, with ≥14 intervention days prior to surgery and are medically cleared to exercise will be eligible. The study will be evaluated using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance Evaluation Framework. RESULTS: The protocol was approved in December 2019 by the Concord Repatriation General Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (reference number 2019/PID13679). Recruitment commenced in January 2020. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, recruitment was paused in March 2020 and reopened in August 2020 with remote or telehealth intervention adaptations. Recruitment ended on December 31, 2021. Over the 16-month recruitment period, a total of 77 participants were recruited. CONCLUSIONS: Prehabilitation represents an opportunity to maximize functional capacity and improve surgical outcomes. The study will provide guidance and contribute to the evidence on the integration of prehabilitation into standard care using adaptive models of health care delivery including telehealth. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTR 12620000409976; https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=378974&isReview=true. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/41101.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.368
GPT teacher head0.627
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicEnhanced Recovery After SurgeryFrench-language works237,207