Effects of a Physical Exercise Program on Quality of Life and Physical Fitness of Breast Cancer Survivors: the MAMA_MOVE Gaia After Treatment Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To assess the effects of a group class physical exercise program on health-related quality of life (HRQOL), physical fitness and activity, and safety in early breast cancer women after treatment, a double-phase trial [16-week control phase (CP) followed by a 16-week intervention phase (IP)] was designed. Outcomes were evaluated at baseline (T1), 8 (T2) and 16 (T3) weeks (CP), and 24 (T4) and 32 (T5) weeks (IP). The primary endpoint was global health status. Out of 82 enrolled patients, 37 completed the IP. Global health status decreased (−10,1; 95% CI −19.8 to −0.4; p = 0.040) during the CP and stabilized during the IP. Physical and sexual functioning increased during the IP (p = 0.008; p = 0.017), while cardiorespiratory fitness increased in the CP (p = 0.004). Upper limb strength and lower limb functionality increased during both phases [CP: p < 0.0001, p = 0.001 (surgical and nonsurgical arm), p = 0.028; IP: p < 0.0001, p = 0.002, p = 0.009]. Body mass index decreased in the IP (p = 0.026). Waist circumference increased in the CP (p = 0.001) and decreased in the IP (p = 0.010); sedentary behaviours and moderate and vigorous physical activity did not change. Adherence to 70% of the sessions was reported in 54% of patients. No serious adverse events related to the intervention were reported. In conclusion, the physical exercise program was able to prevent the decline in global health status and to improve other domains of HRQOL and physical fitness. As physical exercise is not the standard of care in many countries, the implementation of group class programs might be an option.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".