% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Haussmann:180033,
      author       = {A. Haussmann$^*$ and N. Ungar and A. Tsiouris and L.
                      Schmidt and J. Wiskemann and K. Steindorf$^*$ and M.
                      Sieverding},
      title        = {{B}etter not resting: {C}arving out attitudes and their
                      associations with physical activity in people with cancer.},
      journal      = {European journal of cancer care},
      volume       = {31},
      number       = {5},
      issn         = {0961-5423},
      address      = {Oxford [u.a.]},
      publisher    = {Wiley-Blackwell},
      reportid     = {DKFZ-2022-01050},
      pages        = {e13622},
      year         = {2022},
      note         = {#EA:C110# / 2022 Sep;31(5):e13622},
      abstract     = {Evidence on the benefits of physical activity (PA) during
                      cancer has caused a paradigm shift from people with cancer
                      being advised to save energy (rest paradigm) to guidelines
                      recommending them to engage in regular PA (activity
                      paradigm). This study examined the rest and the activity
                      paradigm among people with cancer based on the theory of
                      planned behaviour (TPB).A cross-sectional survey was
                      completed by N = 1244 people $(58\%$ women; M = 59.95 years)
                      with breast, prostate and colorectal cancer, including 15
                      items on rest and activity attitudes. To explain the
                      intention to engage in PA, hierarchical regression analyses
                      were calculated.The two-dimensional structure of attitudes
                      (rest and activity) was confirmed. The agreement with the
                      activity paradigm (M = 4.11; SD = 0.78) was higher compared
                      to the rest paradigm (M = 2.56; SD = 0.78, p < .001). The
                      TPB was an appropriate model to explain the intention to
                      engage in PA (R2 = .59), showing that the activity paradigm,
                      but not the rest paradigm, was significantly associated with
                      participants' intention for PA.Results indicate that the
                      paradigm shift has successfully reached attitudes of people
                      with cancer. Interventions focusing on the benefits of PA
                      rather than addressing rest cognitions promise higher
                      effectiveness in affecting PA levels.NCT02678832.},
      keywords     = {attitude (Other) / breast cancer (Other) / colon cancer
                      (Other) / physical activity (Other) / prostate cancer
                      (Other) / theory of planned behaviour (Other)},
      cin          = {C110},
      ddc          = {610},
      cid          = {I:(DE-He78)C110-20160331},
      pnm          = {313 - Krebsrisikofaktoren und Prävention (POF4-313)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-313},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      pubmed       = {pmid:35599349},
      doi          = {10.1111/ecc.13622},
      url          = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/180033},
}