A Phenomenological Qualitative Exploration of Mind-Body Therapy Use and Effectiveness Among Young, Middle, and Older Adult Cancer Survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Having been diagnosed with and treated for cancer can have negative psychosocial repercussions that may differ across the lifespan. Mind-body therapies (MBTs), such as tai-chi/qigong (TCQ) or mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR), have shown promise in decreasing negative psychosocial outcomes in cancer survivors, but few studies have explored potential differences in MBT use and effectiveness across age groups. METHODS: A descriptive phenomenological qualitative design was used. Participants included young (18-39), middle (40-64), and older (65+) adult cancer survivors who were diagnosed with any type of cancer and had participated in Mindfulness-Based Cancer Recovery (MBCR) or Tai Chi/Qigong (TCQ) MBTs. Semi-structured qualitative interviews explored participants' experiences in MBTs and these were analyzed using descriptive phenomenological analysis. RESULTS: Among the interviews (n = 18), young (n = 6), middle-aged (n = 8), and older (n = 4) adults participated. 5 themes emerged: influences in joining the program, unique lifestyles, positive class experiences, use of media, and program impacts. Though all age groups benefitted from MBT participation, variations between age groups with respect to the benefits received and motivations for joining the program were observed. DISCUSSION: MBTs had beneficial physical and mental health effects on survivors of all age groups. These benefits were particularly connected to the ongoing life stresses common to each age cohort, such as relief from work and family roles for young adults or support during retirement transition for older adults. Hence, access to MBT programs may be beneficial as part of the survivorship plan for patients and the recruitment strategies or content can be adapted by MBT providers to better target and support age-specific groups. More research is required with a larger sample.
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 | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".