MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387642708 · doi:10.3390/jcm12206531

Associations between Symptoms and Exercise Barriers in Breast Cancer Survivors

2023· article· en· W4387642708 on OpenAlexaff
Hunter Scott, Nashira I. Brown, Erica Schleicher, Robert A. Oster, Edward McAuley, Kerry S. Courneya, Philip M. Anton, Diane K. Ehlers, Siobhan M. Phillips, Laura Q. Rogers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Cancer InstituteNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerMoodAnxietyPsychosocialQuality of life (healthcare)Hospital Anxiety and Depression ScalePhysical therapyPopulationDepression (economics)Pittsburgh Sleep Quality IndexRandomized controlled trialCancerInternal medicinePsychiatrySleep qualityInsomnia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite exercise benefits for cancer survivor health, most breast cancer survivors do not meet exercise recommendations. Few studies have examined associations between psychosocial symptoms and exercise barriers in this population. To improve physician exercise counseling by identifying survivors with high barriers in a clinical setting, associations between breast cancer symptoms (fatigue, mood, sleep quality) and exercise barriers were investigated. Physically inactive survivors (N = 320; average age 55 ± 8 years, 81% White, 77% cancer stage I or II) completed a baseline survey for a randomized physical activity trial and secondary analyses were performed. Potential covariates, exercise barriers interference score, Fatigue Symptom Inventory, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index were assessed. Based on multiple linear regression analyses, only HADS Global (B = 0.463, p < 0.001) and number of comorbidities (B = 0.992, p = 0.01) were independently associated with total exercise barriers interference score, explaining 8.8% of the variance (R2 = 0.088, F(2,317) = 15.286, p < 0.001). The most frequent barriers to exercise for survivors above the HADS clinically important cut point included procrastination, routine, and self-discipline. These results indicate greater anxiety levels, depression levels, and comorbidities may be independently associated with specific exercise barriers. Health professionals should consider mood and comorbidities when evaluating survivors for exercise barriers, and tailoring exercise counseling.

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)0.005
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.361 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical MedicineSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207