The Impact of a Remotely-delivered Yoga Intervention on Cognitive Function in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) is a common quality of life complaint among breast cancer survivors (BCS). Evidence suggests that exercise may be able to improve CRCI. The purpose of this study was to explore the feasibility of an 8-week, remotely-delivered yoga intervention and examine its impact on cognitive function, fatigue, and exercise levels in BCS using a concurrent mixed-methods design. Participants (N=18) completed measures of self-reported and objective cognitive function, fatigue, and exercise levels pre- and post-intervention. Qualitative interviews were conducted to understand participants’ experiences with the intervention/study. The intervention surpassed a priori feasibility indicators (adherence rate = 83.7%, attrition rate = 5.4%, no adverse events) and qualitative themes indicated that it was enjoyable and beneficial. Participants had improvements in memory, fatigue, and weekly minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity post-intervention. Future randomized controlled trials examining the impact of virtually-supervised, remotely-delivered yoga interventions on cognitive function in BCS are warranted.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".