Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34740332›Full record

SynthesisBMC cancer2021

Attention to principles of exercise training: an updated systematic review of randomized controlled trials in cancers other than breast and prostate.

Kelcey A Bland, Sarah E Neil-Sztramko, Kendra Zadravec, Mary E Medysky, Jeffrey Kong, Kerri M Winters-Stone, Kristin L Campbell

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 26 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Safety and feasibility of exercise interventions in patients with hematological cancer undergoing chemotherapy: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A Retrospective Cohort Study of Physical Activity and Survival in Patients Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Exercise oncology clinical trials during treatments: a commentary to address the safety concerns of human subjects regulatory reviewers and committees.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  16. Assessment of rehabilitation practices during hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in the United States: a survey.Rehabilitation oncology (American Physical Therapy Association. Oncology Section) · 2024
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Exercise and the gut microbiome: implications for supportive care in cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Effects of exercise mode and intensity on patient-reported outcomes in cancer survivors: a four-arm intervention trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Kelcey A BlandMary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Sarah E Neil-SztramkoDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Kendra ZadravecRehabilitation Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Mary E MedyskyKnight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Jeffrey KongDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, 212-2177 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada.
Kerri M Winters-StoneKnight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Kristin L CampbellRehabilitation Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. kristin.campbell@ubc.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe primary objective of this systematic review was to update our previous review on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of exercise in cancers other than breast or prostate, evaluating: 1) the application of principles of exercise training within the exercise prescription; 2) reporting of the exercise prescription components (i.e., frequency, intensity, time, and type (FITT)); and 3) reporting of participant adherence to FITT. A secondary objective was to examine whether reporting of these interventions had improved over time.

methodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus databases were searched from 2012 to 2020. Eligible studies were RCTs of at least 4 weeks of aerobic and/or resistance exercise that reported on physiological outcomes relating to exercise (e.g., aerobic capacity, muscular strength) in people with cancer other than breast or prostate.

resultsEighty-six new studies were identified in the updated search, for a total of 107 studies included in this review. The principle of specificity was applied by 91%, progression by 32%, overload by 46%, initial values by 72%, reversibility by 7% and diminishing returns by 5%. A significant increase in the percentage of studies that appropriately reported initial values (46 to 80%, p < 0.001) and progression (15 to 37%, p = 0.039) was found for studies published after 2011 compared to older studies. All four FITT prescription components were fully reported in the methods in 58% of all studies, which was higher than the proportion that fully reported adherence to the FITT prescription components in the results (7% of studies). Reporting of the FITT exercise prescription components and FITT adherence did not improve in studies published after 2011 compared to older studies.

conclusionFull reporting of exercise prescription and adherence still needs improvement within exercise oncology RCTs. Some aspects of exercise intervention reporting have improved since 2011, including the reporting of the principles of progression and initial values. Enhancing the reporting of exercise prescriptions, particularly FITT adherence, may provide better context for interpreting study results and improve research to practice translation.

Indexed as

Quality ImprovementRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicExerciseExercise ToleranceHumansMuscle StrengthNeoplasmsPatient CompliancePrescriptionsResistance TrainingSensitivity and SpecificityTime FactorsAerobic exerciseExercise prescriptionNeoplasmsOncologyResistance training

Identifiers

PMID34740332
PMCPMC8569988

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.