Effects of Nordic Walking on Functional Capacity of Women Cohort with Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Breast cancer is one of the most common tumours and one of the leading causes of death among women in all parts of the world. The aim of this study is to investigate the influence of Nordic walking on the functional capacity of women who have undergone surgery for breast cancer. Methods: The study involved a cohort of women who exercised through Nordic walking for 10 weeks (from March to May 2022). The subjects trained with a licenced instructor (INWA method), with two training sessions per week of 70–80 min each. We collected information on pain, arm mobility, hand grip strength, shoulder joint range of motion bilaterally, circumference of both arms, body mass index, physical activity, aerobic capacity, and endurance. Results: There were 14 women, median age 63. BMI was significantly lower (28.9/28.1; p = 0.013) after training and a difference in shoulder range of motion was better (anteflexion right (142.5/170, p = 0.002), retroflexion right (40/60, p = 0.005), abduction right (135/180, p = 0.005), abduction left (135/180, p = 0.005)). There was no difference in right hand strength, while there was a significant difference in left hand strength (19/20, p = 0.007). A correlation was found between BMI and the six-minute walk test (r = −0.70; p = 0.005). Conclusions: Considering the multidimensionality of the disease itself and the results of this study, we believe that Nordic walking is a favourable and good choice of physical activity for breast cancer patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".