MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385462909 · doi:10.1093/jnci/djad146

Trends and cancer-specific patterns of physical activity, sleep duration, and daily sitting time among US cancer survivors, 1997-2018

2023· article· en· W4385462909 on OpenAlexaff
Chao Cao, Alpa V Patel, Raymond Liu, Yin Cao, Christine M. Friedenreich, Lin Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Health Services
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineSittingConfidence intervalCancerNational Health and Nutrition Examination SurveySurvivorship curvePhysical activityPhysical therapyCancer survivorshipCancer survivorGerontologyInternal medicinePopulationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Physical activity, sufficient sleep, and limiting sedentary time may improve cancer survivorship. METHODS: Utilizing US nationally representative samples from the National Health Interview Survey 1997-2018 and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2007-2018, this study investigated the trends of meeting physical activity guidelines, insufficient sleep duration, and sitting time in US cancer survivors (n = 58 527) and noncancer adults (n = 640 109). RESULTS: From 1997 to 2018, the prevalence of meeting physical activity guidelines was consistently lower in cancer survivors than in noncancer adults. Among cancer survivors, the prevalence of meeting physical activity guidelines increased from 34.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 33.1% to 36.8%) to 46.5% (95% CI = 45.0% to 48.1%) for aerobic (≥150 minutes per week at moderate intensity or 75 minutes per week at vigorous intensity), from 13.9% (95% CI = 12.8% to 15.1%) to 23.1% (95% CI = 21.8% to 24.4%) for muscle strengthening (≥2 days per week) activities, and from 9.5% (95% CI = 8.4% to 10.7%) to 17.9% (95% CI = 16.7% to 19.1%) for both combined (all Ptrend < .001). From 2004 to 2018, the prevalence of insufficient sleep duration (<7 hours per day) increased from 28.4% (95% CI = 26.3% to 30.5%) to 30.8% (95% CI = 29.3% to 32.2%) (Ptrend = .004). Daily sitting time increased from 6.09 hours per day (95% CI = 5.71 to 6.46 hours per day) in 2007-2008 to 7.36 hours per day (95% CI = 7.05 to 7.68 hours per day) in 2013-2014 and attenuated to 6.20 hours per day (95% CI = 5.74 to 6.65 hours per day) in 2017-2018. The pattern of physical activity, sleep, and sitting time varied by sex, race and ethnicity, body mass index, cancer type, and time since cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: More than half of US cancer survivors did not meet physical activity guidelines, and a large proportion had insufficient sleep duration and prolonged sitting time.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations43
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer InstituteSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207