Health promotion nursing interventions for female breast cancer survivors: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Map the existing health promotion nursing interventions for female breast cancer survivors (BCS) to describe the approaches used and the characteristics of these interventions in the available studies. DESIGN: A scoping review. DATA SOURCE: Five electronic databases were systematically searched for eligible studies, published between 2002 and 2022. METHODS: Following the Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology, two reviewers independently used Covidence to screen the title, abstract and full text of evidence against the inclusion criteria and extracted data using an extraction table. The PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guided the reporting. No patient or public contribution was necessary. RESULTS: This review included 22 studies on nursing health promotion interventions for BCSs, primarily conducted in specialized care centres. In 20 of 22 studies, nurses employed the educational approach to promote the health of BCSs. Many interventions aimed to support survivors in adopting healthy lifestyles, improving their sexual health, promoting overall well-being and addressing their individual needs by equipping them with self-care skills. Nurses utilized self-monitoring, health education materials and technologies to support survivors' health. CONCLUSION: The review concludes that the nurse used various approaches and interventions with different characteristics to improve the health of BCSs. This review also emphasizes that a limited number of determinants of health have been considered by nurses in the development of health promotion interventions. IMPACT: The review highlights the important role that nurses can play in enhancing the health of female BCSs after cancer treatments. This review can guide future research for developing nursing health promotion interventions in primary care settings for female BCSs. Additionally, the review offers insights to support future research, education and training on diverse approaches and characteristics that nurses can utilize to establish interventions that enhance the health of female BCSs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".