MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7036196331

Augmenter l’activité physique et réduire le temps sédentaire : une clé pour mieux vivre après un cancer? Résultats d’une étude pilote

2024· article· fr· W7036196331 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueR-libre (Université Téluq) · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction (physics)Context (archaeology)Quality of life (healthcare)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pour consulter les références de cette affiche, scannez le code QR! 7,62 5,92 2,85 Cancer: 1ère cause de décès au Canada et au Québec Efficacité des traitements et taux de survie augmentent Période post-traitement = phase pendant laquelle les adultes atteints de cancer sont particulièrement vulnérables aux effets secondaires (physiques et psychologiques) des traitements Importance de l'adoption d'un mode de vie sain Activité physique (AP) American Cancer Society : ≥150 minutes d'AP modérée ou ≥75 minutes d'AP vigoureuse/semaine Temps sédentaire (TS) = dépense énergétique ≤1,5 METs en position assise ou allongée Sédentarité ≠ Inactivité physique Facteur de risque indépendant pour la mortalité et la morbidité liées au cancer À ce jour: associations concurrentes de l'AP et du TS avec le fonctionnement psychologique au cours de la période post-traitement demeurent mal comprises chez les adultes atteints de cancer Objectif: déterminer l'acceptabilité et la faisabilité d'un protocole de sondages quotidiens visant à préciser quels rôles jouent l'AP et le TS dans le fonctionnement psychologique post-traitement d'adultes atteints d'un cancer.8,77

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueR-libre (Université Téluq)Same topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207