Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30969981›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2019

Methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines with physical activity recommendations for people diagnosed with cancer: A systematic critical appraisal using the AGREE II tool.

Shirin M Shallwani, Judy King, Roanne Thomas, Odette Thevenot, Gino De Angelis, Ala' S Aburub, Lucie Brosseau

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Systematic critical appraisal of GRADE recommendations for prostate cancer stagingBiomedica : revista del Instituto Nacional de Salud · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Assessing the methodological strengths and limitations of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) guidelines: a critical appraisal using AGREE II and AGREE-REX tool.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024
    Review
  12. Physical activity in people diagnosed with cancer: a rapid review of recommendations and critical appraisal of international guidelines.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Review
  13. Evaluation of the quality of guidelines for sublingual immunotherapy of allergic rhinitis.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Usability, acceptability, and implementation strategies for the Exercise in Cancer Evaluation and Decision Support (EXCEEDS) algorithm: a Delphi study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Article
  16. Future research in cancer survivorship.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2021
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Shirin M ShallwaniSchool of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2701-3867
Judy KingSchool of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Roanne ThomasSchool of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Odette ThevenotSchool of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Gino De AngelisSchool of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Ala' S AburubPhysical Therapy Department, Faculty of Allied Medical Sciences, Isra University, Amman, Jordan.
Lucie BrosseauSchool of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence suggests physical activity (PA) is beneficial for people diagnosed with cancer. Clinical practice guidelines provide specific recommendations based on available research and are useful in informing evidence-based practice and guiding future research. Little is known on the extent and quality of guidelines on PA targeted to the cancer population. The objectives of this systematic review were to: 1) identify recent clinical practice guidelines including PA or exercise recommendations for people with cancer and 2) critically appraise the methodological quality of the included guidelines. A systematic search of four electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PEDro) and supplementary sources was conducted. Two reviewers independently scanned articles and selected guidelines for inclusion according to the following criteria: published in English, developed or updated in previous five years (January 2012-June 2017), published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, including ≥1 specific recommendation on PA or exercise, and relevant to adults diagnosed with cancer. Subsequently, two trained assessors independently appraised the included guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool. Average scores for six domains (scope and purpose; stakeholder involvement; rigour of development; clarity of presentation; applicability; and editorial independence) and overall quality were calculated. From the literature search, we identified 29 articles, representing 20 sets of guidelines meeting the selection criteria. The guidelines were applicable to the following cancer populations: general (n = 9), breast (n = 5), lung (n = 2), colorectal (n = 1), head and neck (n = 1), myeloma (n = 1) and prostate (n = 1). The guidelines were generally of moderate methodological quality (mean AGREE II overall quality score: 4.6/7, range 2.5-6). The area of lowest quality was in the domain of applicability (mean AGREE II quality domain score: 40%), whereas the strongest domains were related to scope and purpose (81%) and clarity of presentation (77%). Although there are limitations in the primary research informing the recommendations, guidelines of acceptable quality exist to direct stakeholders on targeted PA recommendations for a range of cancer populations. Improvement is needed in the applicability of guidelines to enhance their relevance and clinical use. Health professionals can play an important role in supporting people with cancer throughout the disease trajectory and benefit from access to well-developed and appropriate materials to interpret research knowledge on effective rehabilitation strategies, including PA.

Indexed as

AdultDatabases, FactualExerciseFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasmsPractice Guidelines as Topic

Identifiers

PMID30969981
PMCPMC6457630

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.