SynthesisOncology and therapy2026
Telerehabilitation for Pain, Function, and Quality of Life in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Oncology and therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionCancer rehabilitation improves function, quality of life, and symptom control, yet access to specialized programs is limited by geographic, financial, and systemic barriers. Telerehabilitation has emerged as a scalable alternative; however, its effectiveness across cancer types and intervention modalities remains heterogeneous.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized comparative studies evaluating telerehabilitation in adults with cancer. Searches were performed in MEDLINE, LILACS, ScienceDirect, PEDro, Cochrane Central, Scopus, Springer, Taylor & Francis, and Google Scholar from January 1, 2010 to September 30, 2025. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data. Risk of bias was assessed using the PEDro scale (RCTs) and the MINORS tool (nonrandomized studies). Given heterogeneity in measures and outcome definitions, we applied structured narrative synthesis with vote counting (SWiM/Cochrane), complemented by effect-direction and albatross plots.
resultsThirteen studies (11 randomized controlled trials and 2 nonrandomized comparative trials) were included, encompassing populations with breast, lung, and esophageal cancers, hematologic malignancies, gliomas, and mixed cohorts. Interventions were categorized into three main delivery modalities: supervised synchronous exercise via videoconferencing, web- or app-based programs incorporating remote monitoring, and telephone-based counseling. Across studies, telerehabilitation consistently demonstrated improvements in physical function (e.g., walking capacity, muscular strength, and peak VO
conclusionTelerehabilitation is a safe and effective strategy to improve function and reduce fatigue in oncology, with less consistent evidence for HRQoL and pain. Supervised synchronous models provide the strongest benefits. Multicenter RCTs with standardized outcomes and longer follow-up are needed.
Indexed as
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.