MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412522920 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-11660-0

Implementing exercise and self-management for women with breast cancer during treatment: results of the NEXT-BRCA randomized controlled trial

2025· article· en· W4412522920 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jenna Smith‐Turchyn, Derek W. Stouth, Joshua A.J. Keogh, Elizabeth Ball, Myanca Rodrigues, Julie Richardson, Louise Bordeleau, Sarah Neil‐Sztramko, Oren Levine, Lehana Thabane, Catherine M. Sabiston, Som D. Mukherjee

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsImpactUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialBreast cancerPhysical therapyPsychological interventionCancerIntervention (counseling)Institutional repositoryInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility (recruitment, retention, and adherence rates) and effectiveness of institution-based exercise and self-management (SM) on physical activity (PA) level, exercise knowledge and intention, health status, functional capacity, patient engagement, and lower extremity strength for individuals with breast cancer receiving treatment. We conducted a hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial (type 1), including female participants with a current diagnosis of breast cancer undergoing treatment. Participants were randomized to (1) exercise and SM (EXSM; 8 in person exercise sessions and SM education), (2) SM only (8 sessions of SM), or (3) usual care (UC; no intervention). The RE-AIM model was used to explore the interventions success. The primary outcome was PA level at post-intervention. An ANCOVA determined effectiveness of the intervention at each timepoint. Eighty-five participants were included in the study. Study recruitment was 72%. Both the EXSM and SM interventions had high levels of retention (EXSM: 72%; SM: 93%) and adherence (EXSM: 76%; SM: 93%). A significant effect of group was found between EXSM and UC for PA level at post-intervention timepoint (adjusted mean difference: 9.28 (95% CI 6.45, 12.10); p < 0.001), and was maintained at 6- and 12-month follow-ups (11.78 (8.93, 14.64); p < 0.001; 11.10 (8.28, 13.92); p < 0.001). Exercise and SM using strategies that maximize availability and accessibility of exercise and SM services for survivors of breast cancer can successfully be implemented during treatment within the cancer institution in Canada. Future research should explore implementation of this program at multiple centers, maximizing referral of diverse participants from diverse providers, and consider cost-effectiveness of the interventions provided over the long term in order to facilitate sustained implementation across cancer centers.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicCancer survivorship and care→French-language works237,207→