MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399573478 · doi:10.2196/54126

Behavioral Weight Loss Programs for Cancer Survivors Throughout Maryland: Protocol for a Pragmatic Trial and Participant Characteristics

2024· article· en· W4399573478 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gerald J. Jerome, Lawrence J. Appel, Linda Bunyard, Arlene Dalcin, Nowella Durkin, Jeanne Charleston, Norma Kanarek, Michael A. Carducci, Nae‐Yuh Wang, Hsin‐Chieh Yeh

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsWeight lossPsychological interventionCancerProtocol (science)GerontologyClinical trialMedicinePsychologyPhysical therapyAlternative medicineNursingObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Clinical trials examining lifestyle interventions for weight loss in cancer survivors have been demonstrated to be safe, feasible, and effective. However, scalable weight loss programs are needed to support their widespread implementation. The ASPIRE trial was designed to evaluate real-world, lifestyle-based, weight loss programs for cancer survivors throughout Maryland. Objective The objectives of this protocol paper are to describe the design of a nonrandomized pragmatic trial, study recruitment, and baseline characteristics of participants. Methods Participants were aged ≥18 years, residing in Maryland, with a BMI ≥25 kg/m2, who reported a diagnosis of a malignant solid tumor, completed curative treatment, and had no ongoing or planned cancer treatment. Enrollment criteria were minimized to increase generalizability. The primary recruitment source was the Johns Hopkins Health System electronic health records (EHRs). Participants selected 1 of 3 remotely delivered weight loss programs: self-directed, app-supported, or coach-supported program. Results Participants were recruited across all 5 geographic regions of Maryland. Targeted invitations using EHRs accounted for 287 (84.4%) of the 340 participants enrolled. Of the 5644 patients invited through EHR, 5.1% (287/5644) enrolled. Participants had a mean age of 60.7 (SD 10.8) years, 74.7% (254/340) were female, 55.9% (190/340) identified as non-Hispanic Black, 58.5% (199/340) had a bachelor’s degree, and the average BMI was 34.1 kg/m2 (SD 5.9 kg/m2). The most common types of cancers were breast (168/340, 49.4%), prostate (72/340, 21.2%), and thyroid (39/340, 8.5%). The self-directed weight loss program (n=91) included 25 participants who agreed to provide weights through a study scale; the app-supported program (n=142) included 108 individuals who agreed to provide their weight measurements; and the coach-supported weight loss program included 107 participants. We anticipate final analysis will take place in the fall of 2024. Conclusions Using EHR-based recruitment efforts, this study took a pragmatic approach to reach and enroll cancer survivors into remotely delivered weight loss programs. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04534309; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04534309 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/54126

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)0.059
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0590.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0870.014

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 head0.462
GPT teacher head0.636
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicCancer Risks and FactorsFrench-language works237,207