Oncology nurses’ knowledge, perceptions, and perceived barriers related to discussing physical activity with patients with cancer, including older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cancer and its treatments accelerate frailty in older adults with cancer (OACA). Exercise is safe and beneficial during and after treatment, yet many, including older adults, do not meet current exercise guidelines. The primary objective of this study was to understand oncology clinic nurses' knowledge and current practices regarding exercise discussion and promotion in patients with cancer, including in older patients. The secondary objectives were to: (1) explore barriers to initiating exercise discussion and promotion; and (2) explore the relationship between oncology nurses' exercise behavior, and their knowledge about existing guidelines and exercise promotion practices. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted via REDCap between February and May 2023 involving nurses who practice in outpatient oncology clinics. The survey was developed based on the expert consensus of the study team and was distributed through professional networks. Descriptive statistics and chi-square were used to analyze the collected data. RESULTS: Ninety-seven nurses participated. The majority were aged 41-50 years (38.1%) and 31-40 years (27.8%). Mean years of practice was 13.5 (0.5-45). Many nurses lacked formal training on exercise discussion with patients (57.8%), yet expressed interest in learning (91%). Most nurses (90%) agreed exercise benefits patients during treatment. The majority (75%) reported discussing or recommending exercise to patients with cancer, especially advising patients to stay active during and after treatment. Barriers to promoting exercise included limited clinic time (77.7%) and concerns about safety especially for OACA (72.2%). 37.6% of nurses reported engaging in moderate-intensity aerobic activity. 26.6% endorsed both being quite/very knowledgeable in discussing exercise guidelines with patients with cancer in general and 74.7% reported typically discussing exercise with patients with cancer in general. A statistically significant association was found between nurses' exercise promotion behaviour and perceived knowledge about exercise promotion (p = .01). CONCLUSION: Many nurses agree that exercise promotion is important and consider it part of their scope of practice to discuss exercise with patients with cancer. Although perceived knowledge regarding specific recommendations is generally low, nurses express interest in enhancing their knowledge and participating in diverse educational opportunities. Institutions should prioritize nurse education to support efforts in exercise promotion. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".