Physical activity and cognitive function in breast cancer survivors: a cross-sectional comparative study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Breast cancer is currently the most frequently diagnosed cancer worldwide and the leading cause of cancer-related death among women.Recent studies have emphasized the various challenges survivors encounter post-treatment, including anxiety, sleep disturbances, and depression, all of which significantly affect their quality of life.Despite growing interest in this field, there is limited research examining the association between the levels of physical activity and cognitive function in breast cancer survivors.Aims: This study aimed to examine the relationship between physical activity levels, cognitive function, and quality of life in breast cancer survivors.We asked whether physical activity supports cognitive health and enhances post-treatment recovery. Materials and Methods:A cross-sectional comparative study was conducted with breast cancer survivors (BCS) and age-matched healthy controls (CG).Physical activity was assessed via the International Physical Activity Questionnaire.Quality of life and cognitive function were measured using the EORTC-QLQ-C30 and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment.Group comparisons were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test (p < 0.05).
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.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it