MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313573805 · doi:10.3390/curroncol30010054

Poor Muscle Status, Dietary Protein Intake, Exercise Levels, Quality of Life and Physical Function in Women with Metastatic Breast Cancer at Chemotherapy Commencement and during Follow-Up

2023· article· en· W4313573805 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jessica Parkinson, Amelia Bandera, Megan Crichton, Catherine Shannon, Natasha Woodward, Adam Hodgkinson, Luke Millar, Laisa Teleni, Barbara S. van der Meij

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSarcopeniaBreast cancerQuality of life (healthcare)Internal medicineLean body massBioelectrical impedance analysisGrip strengthCancerPhysical therapyBody mass indexBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to investigate nutritional status, body composition, dietary protein intake, handgrip strength, 6 min or 4 m walk tests, self-reported physical activity, physical function, and quality of life (QoL-EORTC-QLQc30) at commencement of chemotherapy; to detect changes over time (from commencement of chemotherapy, and after 3, 6, 12, 26 and 52 weeks) in women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC); and to investigate the relationship between nutritional variables. ‘Sarcopenia’ was defined as low muscle mass and strength, ‘myosteatosis’ as muscle fat-infiltration (CT scan). Continuous variables were analysed using paired t-tests between baseline and follow-ups. Fifteen women (54y, 95% CI [46.3;61.2]) were recruited. At baseline, malnutrition was present in 3 (20%) participants, sarcopenia in 3 (20%) and myosteatosis in 7 (54%). Thirteen (87%) participants had low protein intake; low handgrip strength was observed in 0, and low walk test distance and physical activity in four (27%) participants. Physical function and QoL were low in 10 (67%) and 9 (60%), respectively. QoL between baseline and 52 weeks decreased by 11.7 (95% CI [2.4;20.9], p = 0.025). Other variables did not significantly change over time. In this small study sample, myosteatosis, low dietary protein intake, low exercise levels and impaired quality of life and physical function are common.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations19
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207