Impact of Baduanjin Qigong Exercise on Fatigue in Patients with Lung Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background:Patients report fatigue as the most distressing symptom associated with cancer and treatment. Baduanjin has beneficial effects on reducing fatigue. However, no relevant randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of Baduanjin exercise with routine exercise in patients with lung cancer and fatigue have been reported. Methods:This blinded trial aimed to compare the effect of Baduanjin versus routine exercise on fatigue for patients with lung cancer. Participants in the intervention group received Baduanjin training and performed Baduanjin every week, while those in the control group performed routine exercise at the same frequency. Results:A total of 73 patients were analyzed. After the intervention, patients in the Baduanjin group experienced significant improvement in fatigue and pain (p < 0.05), while no significant difference in Edmonton Symptom Assessment System items were observed among patients in the exercise group. Conclusion:Our study showed that Baduanjin was a better exercise than routine activity in relieving their fatigue.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".