ReviewResearch (Washington, D.C.)2025
Applications of Robotic Exoskeletons as Motion-Assistive Systems in Cancer Rehabilitation.
Review in Research (Washington, D.C.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exercise interventions remodel the aging microenvironment to improve prognosis in older patients with cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- The multidimensional roles and mechanisms of exercise intervention in pediatric oncology.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Integrating multi-omics insights into music and dance-based physical activity for cancer rehabilitation: implications for patient education and precision oncology.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Review
- High ASIC3 Expression Correlates with Poor Prognosis in Lung Cancer Patients and Mediates Hypercapnic Acidosis-Induced EMT in A549 Cells.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic exoskeletons have emerged as promising motion-assistive technologies to meet the growing demand for structured, personalized cancer rehabilitation. This review critically examines their application in enhancing functional recovery, alleviating cancer-related fatigue, and improving quality of life among cancer patients and survivors. We first outline current evidence-based exercise strategies in cancer rehabilitation, followed by an analysis of how robotic exoskeletons complement and extend these approaches by restoring mobility, strengthening musculature, and supporting psychological well-being. Additionally, we assess how well they combine with multimodal interventions like nutritional, psychological, and digital therapeutics and their benefits. The convergence of artificial intelligence, wearable sensors, and telemedicine is also reshaping the landscape of remote, adaptive rehabilitation. Despite encouraging preliminary data, widespread clinical adoption remains limited due to challenges related to cost, exoskeleton system accessibility, safety, and long-term efficacy. We call for large-scale clinical trials, interdisciplinary collaboration, and policy reforms to promote equitable access to robotic-assisted rehabilitation. Collectively, this review offers a comprehensive perspective on the technical principles, therapeutic potential, and future directions of robotic exoskeletons as innovative tools in cancer recovery.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.