Pilot Testing of Build StaMINA: A Tailored Physical Activity Program for Adults Receiving Treatment for Acute Myeloid Leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is an aggressive and often debilitating cancer for adults across the treatment trajectory. Patients experience frequent hospitalization, sedentariness, and negative sequelae including physical dysfunction and symptoms, which increase their risk for adverse events and mortality. OBJECTIVE: To test the preliminary efficacy of a tailored physical activity (PA) program. METHODS: This is a 2-group randomized controlled trial to explore the preliminary effects of a home-based tailored PA program versus attention control. The intervention includes PA across all physical domains important for independence. Assessments included physical function (6-Minute Walk Distance, primary), cognition (Montreal Cognitive Assessment), and patient-reported symptoms (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) at baseline and 6 and 12 weeks. RESULTS: Forty-six adults with AML were randomized into intervention (n = 22) and control (n = 24). Participants had a mean age of 58 years. No adverse events were reported. We observed a 22% attrition and 83% adherence to the intervention. Clinically significant increases in 6-Minute Walk Distance (mean, 49.78 ± 98.9 vs 3.7 ± 155.1 m) and mean scores for cognition (3.2 [9.9] vs -0.7 [9.7]), depression (-5.1 [12.9] vs -1.8 [7.7]), and self-efficacy (3.7 [8.0] vs 1.4 [7.2]) from baseline to 12 weeks were found in the intervention group versus control group. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support safety, feasibility, and further testing of this intervention in a larger trial powered to evaluate efficacy of this tailored PA intervention to support adult AML survivors during treatment. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This tailored intervention has the potential to support patients with AML and manage common sequelae across the treatment trajectory.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".