4.0 Article

Internet-Based Physical Activity Intervention Targeting Young Adult Cancer Survivors

期刊

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/jayao.2011.0040

关键词

survivorship; physical activity; exercise; internet

类别

资金

  1. National Cancer Institute [R03 CA134197]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Young adults who have been treated for cancer face several health and psychosocial risks. To minimize these risks, is it imperative that they address any modifiable risk factors, such as sedentary lifestyle. Unfortunately, more than half of young adult cancer survivors remain sedentary. To facilitate the adoption of physical activity (PA) in this population-potentially reducing health and psychosocial risks-we developed and pilot tested an internet-based PA intervention for young survivors. Patients and methods: Eighteen young adults, aged 18 to 39, who had been diagnosed with cancer in the past 10 years were recruited. Participants were randomized to receive access to the PA website for 12 weeks or information about other cancer-related websites. Intervention feasibility and acceptability was assessed only among those in the PA website group; PA and psychosocial outcomes (mood, fatigue) were assessed in both groups. Results: Findings revealed that 86% of participants in the PA website group would recommend the intervention to others and most (71%) were satisfied'' or very satisfied'' with it. Further, 100% rated getting onto the website as very easy'' and 86% rated the information on the site as very easy'' to understand. The logging feature, followed by the goal-setting feature, were most often accessed by participants. Participants also rated the graphing and stage-matched manual features as helpful. Estimates of effect sizes for between-group differences at 12 weeks were medium for PA outcomes and large for psychosocial outcomes. Conclusions: This internet-based PA intervention targeting young adult cancer survivors is feasible and acceptable and may benefit this population.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据