Physical Activity, Sedentary Time, and Psychosocial Functioning among Adults with Cancer: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The post-treatment period (after the completion of primary cancer treatment) is a phase during which adults with cancer are particularly vulnerable to the physical and psychological side effects of treatment. Adopting healthy lifestyle habits during this time is essential to mitigate these effects. This scoping review investigated the associations of physical activity (PA) and sedentary time (ST) with two post-treatment psychosocial indicators among adults with cancer: psychological functioning and quality of life (QoL). An exhaustive search was performed in January 2023 across five databases, namely APA PsycInfo, MedLine, SPORTDiscuss, SCOPUS, and CINAHL, adhering to PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews. Twenty articles met the inclusion criteria; 16 used a cross-sectional design, while 4 used a longitudinal one. PA and ST were assessed mainly with accelerometers (n = 17), and psychosocial indicators with self-reported questionnaires (n = 20). Most studies linked higher PA levels to reduced anxiety (n = 3) and depression (n = 4) symptoms, and elevated ST to higher psychological symptoms (n = 3). Opposite associations were observed for QoL (n = 5). Altogether, PA appeared to be more strongly related to psychological functioning and QoL than ST. This scoping review highlights associations of PA and ST with psychological functioning and QoL among adults with cancer in the post-treatment period. However, future studies must prioritize longitudinal designs to establish directionality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".