MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387705393 · doi:10.1186/s40814-023-01405-z

Hybrid delivery of cluster-set resistance training for individuals previously treated for lung cancer: the results of a single-arm feasibility trial

2023· article· en· W4387705393 on OpenAlexaff
Ciaran M. Fairman, Otis L. Owens, Kristina L. Kendall, James Steele, Alec Schumpp, Christopher Latella, Morgan T. Jones, Lauren Marcotte, John M. Dawson, C. M. J. Peddle-McIntyre, Karen Kane McDonnell

Bibliographic record

VenuePilot and Feasibility Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of South Carolina
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyIntervention (counseling)Lung cancerLikert scaleQuality of life (healthcare)Cluster (spacecraft)PsychologyOncologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Individuals with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are burdened by long-lasting symptoms (e.g., dyspnea and fatigue) post-treatment. These symptoms often reduce physical activity levels and increase the risk of functional decline. Though we have previously proposed cluster-set resistance training to mitigate symptom burden in lung cancer, there is currently no data on the feasibility or acceptability of this mode of exercise in cancer. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility and acceptability of a hybrid-delivery home-based cluster-set resistance training program in individuals with NSCLC stages I-III (i.e., early stage). METHODS: This study aimed to recruit individuals with NSCLC stages I-III post-treatment to participate in 8 weeks of home-based resistance training, 3 days per week. The program included supervised sessions in the participants' homes and virtual supervision via videoconferencing. The primary outcome measure of feasibility was evaluated through recruitment, retention, and intervention fidelity (i.e., proportion of exercise completed, relative to what was prescribed). Intervention acceptability (i.e., ease and quality of virtual delivery, level of difficulty, and home-based approach) was assessed using a 4-point Likert-type scale from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree". RESULTS: Fourteen participants were recruited over a 6-month period, with 11 completing the intervention (2 withdrew due to unrelated illness, 1 withdrew due to requiring active treatment), yielding a retention rate of 79%. Characteristics of the participants who completed the intervention (n = 11) were as follows: mean age: 71 ± 10 years, mean BMI: 29.1 ± 6.5, and average time since diagnosis was 62 ± 51 months. Of completers, 27% were male, and 36% were Black; 10 were stage I (91%), and one was stage II (9%). Mean session attendance was 86.4 ± 9.5%. Mean intervention fidelity was 83.1 ± 13.1%. With regard to acceptability, > 90% of participants positively rated all aspects of the intervention delivery. No adverse events related to exercise were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: The hybrid delivery of a home-based resistance exercise program for individuals previously treated for early-stage NSCLC was found to be safe and feasible. Adaptations to the program for future interventions are required, particularly surrounding resistance exercise programming, and intervention delivery with home visits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05014035 . Registered January 20, 2021.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.666

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.303
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.113 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePilot and Feasibility StudiesSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207