Effects of Resistance Exercise on Quality of Life, Anxiety, Depression, Sleep Quality and Inflammatory Parameters in Patients with Colorectal Cancer Undergoing Active Treatment: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this pilot randomized clinical trial was to determine the effect of adding a supervised resistance exercise programme to a home-based physical activity plan on health-related quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer undergoing active treatment. The secondary objectives were to evaluate its effects on anxiety, depression, sleep quality, and inflammatory parameters. METHODS: This is a pilot randomized clinical trial with parallel groups. Patients with CRC were recruited through the Oncology Department at the Salamanca University Health Care Complex in Spain. They were randomly allocated to receive either a home-based physical activity plus a supervised resistance training programme, or the home-based physical activity plan only. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life measures and the secondary outcomes included anxiety, depression and sleep quality evaluations. The supervised training lasted 8 weeks for each patient. RESULTS: = 0.015). However, no significant effect was found with regard to other health-related quality of life, anxiety, depression or sleep variables. CONCLUSIONS: Fatigue and constipation in patients with CRC receiving chemo- and/or immunotherapy may benefit from the introduction of supervised resistance exercise training programmes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".