Matthew Cox1, Cindy Carmack1, Daniel Hughes2, George Baum1, Jubilee Brown3, Anuja Jhingran4, Karen Lu3, Karen Basen-Engquist1. 1. Department of Behavioral Science, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Texas Health Science Center. 3. Department of Gynecological Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Research has shown that physical activity (PA) has a positive effect on cancer survivors, including improving quality of life, improving physical fitness, and decreasing risk for cancer recurrence in some cancer types. Theory-based intervention approaches have identified self-efficacy as a potential mediator of PA intervention. This study examines the temporal relationships at 4 time points (T1-T4) between several social-cognitive theory constructs and PA among a group of endometrial cancer survivors receiving PA intervention. METHOD: A sample of 98 sedentary women who were at least 6 months posttreatment for endometrial cancer were given interventions to increase their PA. We tested whether modeling, physiological somatic sensations, and social support at previous time points predicted self-efficacy at later time points, which in turn would predict PA at later time points. RESULTS: Results indicated that, as physiological somatic sensations at T2 decreased, self-efficacy at T3 increased, which led to an increase in PA at T4. This suggests that self-efficacy is a significant mediator between physiological somatic sensations and PA. Exploratory follow-up models suggest that model fit can be improved with the addition of contemporaneous effects between self-efficacy and PA at T3 and T4, changing the timing of the mediational relationships. CONCLUSION: Physiological somatic sensations appear to be an important construct to target to increase PA in this population. Self-efficacy appeared to mediate the relationship between physiological somatic sensations and PA, but the timing of this relationship requires further study. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
OBJECTIVE: Research has shown that physical activity (PA) has a positive effect on cancer survivors, including improving quality of life, improving physical fitness, and decreasing risk for cancer recurrence in some cancer types. Theory-based intervention approaches have identified self-efficacy as a potential mediator of PA intervention. This study examines the temporal relationships at 4 time points (T1-T4) between several social-cognitive theory constructs and PA among a group of endometrial cancer survivors receiving PA intervention. METHOD: A sample of 98 sedentary women who were at least 6 months posttreatment for endometrial cancer were given interventions to increase their PA. We tested whether modeling, physiological somatic sensations, and social support at previous time points predicted self-efficacy at later time points, which in turn would predict PA at later time points. RESULTS: Results indicated that, as physiological somatic sensations at T2 decreased, self-efficacy at T3 increased, which led to an increase in PA at T4. This suggests that self-efficacy is a significant mediator between physiological somatic sensations and PA. Exploratory follow-up models suggest that model fit can be improved with the addition of contemporaneous effects between self-efficacy and PA at T3 and T4, changing the timing of the mediational relationships. CONCLUSION: Physiological somatic sensations appear to be an important construct to target to increase PA in this population. Self-efficacy appeared to mediate the relationship between physiological somatic sensations and PA, but the timing of this relationship requires further study. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
Authors: Kerry S Courneya; Kristina H Karvinen; Kristin L Campbell; Robert G Pearcey; George Dundas; Valerie Capstick; Katia S Tonkin Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Cheryl L Rock; Colleen Doyle; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Jeffrey Meyerhardt; Kerry S Courneya; Anna L Schwartz; Elisa V Bandera; Kathryn K Hamilton; Barbara Grant; Marji McCullough; Tim Byers; Ted Gansler Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2012-04-26 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Vicki S Conn; Adam R Hafdahl; Davina C Porock; Roxanne McDaniel; Paul J Nielsen Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2006-01-31 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: William L Haskell; I-Min Lee; Russell R Pate; Kenneth E Powell; Steven N Blair; Barry A Franklin; Caroline A Macera; Gregory W Heath; Paul D Thompson; Adrian Bauman Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Emily Cox-Martin; Matthew G Cox; Karen Basen-Engquist; Cathy Bradley; Janice A Blalock Journal: Psychol Health Med Date: 2019-10-19 Impact factor: 2.423