The 24-Hour Movement Paradigm: An integrated approach to the measurement and promotion of daily activity in cancer clinical trials
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increased physical activity (PA), improved sleep, and decreased sedentary behavior (SB) are essential components of supportive care for cancer survivors. However, researchers and health care professionals have achieved limited success in improving these behaviors among cancer survivors. One potential reasoning is that, over the past two decades, guidelines for promoting and measuring PA, sleep, and SB have been largely siloed. With greater understanding of these three behaviors, health behavior researchers have recently developed a new paradigm: the 24-Hour movement approach. This approach considers PA, SB, and sleep as movement behaviors along a continuum that represent low through vigorous intensity activity. Together these three behaviors form the sum of an individual's movement across a 24-hour day. While this paradigm has been studied in the general population, its usage is still limited in cancer populations. Here, we seek to highlight (a) the potential benefits of this new paradigm for clinical trial design in oncology; (b) how this approach can allow for greater integration of wearable technology as a means of assessing and monitoring patient health outside the clinical setting, improving patient autonomy through self-monitoring of movement behavior. Ultimately, implementation of the 24-Hour movement paradigm will allow health behavior research in oncology to better promote and assess critical health behaviors to support the long-term well-being for cancer patients and survivors.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.137 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it