Literature DB >> 29423679

Predictors of enrollment in individual- and couple-based lifestyle intervention trials for cancer survivors.

Emily Cox-Martin1, Jaejoon Song2, Wendy Demark-Wahnefried3, Elizabeth J Lyons4, Karen Basen-Engquist5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To utilize data from lifestyle intervention pilot studies for cancer survivors to elucidate demographic, disease-related, and health behavior factors that might predict enrollment in this type of research. Additionally, factors were differentially compared based on intervention design (i.e., individual versus couple-based).
METHODS: Secondary data analysis was conducted regarding predictors of enrollment into lifestyle intervention studies, including Healthy Moves Weight Loss (individual participants, screened n = 89, enrolled n = 30) and Healthy Moves Couples (survivors and their partners, screened n = 197, enrolled n = 23). Due to small sample sizes, common in pilot studies, random forest analyses were used to maximize information yielded by the data.
RESULTS: Results identified numerous important predictors of enrollment in individual and couple-based lifestyle interventions. Percent energy from fat and physical activity minutes were identified as important predictors for both recruitment methods. Age, cancer site, and marital status were important predictors of enrollment in the individual-based intervention. Weight, fiber consumption, and disease-related symptom severity and interference were important predictors of enrollment in the couple-based intervention.
CONCLUSION: Although there was some overlap in predictors for enrollment between studies, many differential predictors were identified between individual versus couple-based study designs for lifestyle intervention in cancer survivors. Future lifestyle intervention studies for cancer survivors may benefit from targeting different predictors of enrollment based on study design to optimize recruitment. Additionally, understanding predictors may allow certain barriers to enrollment (i.e., symptom burden) to be directly addressed, making lifestyle intervention research more feasible and acceptable to difficult-to-recruit survivors.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cancer survivors; Enrollment; Lifestyle intervention; Random forest

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29423679     DOI: 10.1007/s00520-018-4084-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Support Care Cancer        ISSN: 0941-4355            Impact factor:   3.603


  37 in total

Review 1.  Second malignant neoplasms and cardiovascular disease following radiotherapy.

Authors:  Lois B Travis; Andrea K Ng; James M Allan; Ching-Hon Pui; Ann R Kennedy; X George Xu; James A Purdy; Kimberly Applegate; Joachim Yahalom; Louis S Constine; Ethel S Gilbert; John D Boice
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2012-02-06       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Variables associated with familial suicide attempts in a sample of suicide attempters.

Authors:  Enrique Baca-Garcia; M Mercedes Perez-Rodriguez; Dolores Saiz-Gonzalez; Ignacio Basurte-Villamor; Jeronimo Saiz-Ruiz; José M Leiva-Murillo; Mario de Prado-Cumplido; Ricardo Santiago-Mozos; Antonio Artés-Rodríguez; Jose de Leon
Journal:  Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2007-06-07       Impact factor: 5.067

3.  Detecting and monitoring the symptoms of Parkinson's disease using smartphones: A pilot study.

Authors:  S Arora; V Venkataraman; A Zhan; S Donohue; K M Biglan; E R Dorsey; M A Little
Journal:  Parkinsonism Relat Disord       Date:  2015-03-07       Impact factor: 4.891

4.  Classifying undetermined poisoning deaths.

Authors:  A E Donaldson; G Y Larsen; L Fullerton-Gleason; L M Olson
Journal:  Inj Prev       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 2.399

5.  CT texture analysis of renal masses: pilot study using random forest classification for prediction of pathology.

Authors:  Siva P Raman; Yifei Chen; James L Schroeder; Peng Huang; Elliot K Fishman
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2014-09-16       Impact factor: 3.173

6.  Assessing symptom distress in cancer patients: the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory.

Authors:  C S Cleeland; T R Mendoza; X S Wang; C Chou; M T Harle; M Morrissey; M C Engstrom
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2000-10-01       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Global histone modification patterns predict risk of prostate cancer recurrence.

Authors:  David B Seligson; Steve Horvath; Tao Shi; Hong Yu; Sheila Tze; Michael Grunstein; Siavash K Kurdistani
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2005-06-30       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 8.  Aetiology, genetics and prevention of secondary neoplasms in adult cancer survivors.

Authors:  Lois B Travis; Wendy Demark Wahnefried; James M Allan; Marie E Wood; Andrea K Ng
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-03-26       Impact factor: 66.675

9.  Performance of a short tool to assess dietary intakes of fruits and vegetables, percentage energy from fat and fibre.

Authors:  Frances E Thompson; Douglas Midthune; Amy F Subar; Lisa L Kahle; Arthur Schatzkin; Victor Kipnis
Journal:  Public Health Nutr       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.022

10.  Interest in Health Behavior Intervention Delivery Modalities Among Cancer Survivors: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Emily C Martin; Karen Basen-Engquist; Matthew G Cox; Elizabeth J Lyons; Cindy L Carmack; Janice A Blalock; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried
Journal:  JMIR Cancer       Date:  2016-02-11
View more
  2 in total

1.  Current opportunities to catalyze research in nutrition and cancer prevention - an interdisciplinary perspective.

Authors: 
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2019-07-30       Impact factor: 8.775

2.  Healthy Moves to Improve Lifestyle Behaviors of Cancer Survivors and Their Spouses: Feasibility and Preliminary Results of Intervention Efficacy.

Authors:  Cindy L Carmack; Nathan H Parker; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Laura Shely; George Baum; Ying Yuan; Sharon H Giordano; Miguel Rodriguez-Bigas; Curtis Pettaway; Karen Basen-Engquist
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2021-12-14       Impact factor: 5.717

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.