MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415359772 · doi:10.3390/cancers17203375

Stifled Motivation, Systemic Neglect: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Inactivity in Post-Chemotherapy Cancer Survivors in the Middle East and North Africa Region

2025· article· en· W4415359772 on OpenAlexaff
Mariem Gaddour, M. Ammar, Leïla Ben Fatma, Halil İbrahim Ceylan, Ines Loubiri, Nedra Feni, Sonia Jemni, Luca Puce, Nicola Luigi Bragazzi, Ismail Dergaa

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancerBonferroni correctionDescriptive statisticsScale (ratio)Physical activitySurvivorship curveQuality of life (healthcare)Telephone interviewHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Physical activity provides substantial survival and quality-of-life benefits for cancer survivors, yet participation remains suboptimal globally, particularly in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) regions. This study represents the first comprehensive examination of physical activity barriers and facilitators among Tunisian cancer survivors. Methods: This cross-sectional study recruited 120 cancer survivors ≥3 months post-chemotherapy completion from University Hospital Farhat Hached, Sousse, Tunisia (October–December 2024). Participants completed validated questionnaires via structured telephone interviews: the International Physical Activity Questionnaire Short Form (IPAQ-SF), the Physical Activity Barriers After Cancer scale (PABAC), the Fatigue Assessment Scale (FAS), and the Patient Activation Measure (PAM-13). Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, correlation analyses, and multivariable regression modeling with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. Results: Participants (mean age 51.89 ± 10.2 years, 73.9% female) demonstrated significant physical activity declines post-chemotherapy: moderate activity decreased from 31.1% to 1.7% (p < 0.001), median intensity declined from 297 to 44 MET-min/week (p < 0.001). Mean PABAC score was 29.72 ± 5.13, with cognitive barriers predominating (2.85 ± 0.58). Fatigue was universal (100%), with 21% reporting severe fatigue (FAS ≥ 35). Only 26.1% received exercise guidance from healthcare professionals. PABAC demonstrated excellent predictive performance for physical inactivity (AUC = 0.805, 95%CI: 0.724–0.887). Independent predictors of higher barriers included fatigue severity (β = 0.466, p < 0.001), low patient activation (β = −0.091, p = 0.010), and advanced cancer stage (β = 1.932, p = 0.008). Conclusions: Tunisian cancer survivors experience substantial, multidimensional barriers to physical activity, with inadequate healthcare guidance representing a critical system-level gap. Findings support the development of culturally adapted, multidisciplinary interventions that target modifiable cognitive and symptom-related barriers, while enhancing patient activation and healthcare provider engagement.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207