Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32011152›Full record

SynthesisHealth psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association2020

Predicting physical activity among cancer survivors: Meta-analytic path modeling of longitudinal studies.

Rachel Hirschey, Ashley Leak Bryant, Catherine Macek, Claudio Battaglini, Sheila Santacroce, Kerry S Courneya, Jennifer S Walker, Aya Avishai, Paschal Sheeran

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. PERSPECTIVEs on supervised exercise programs in people with metastatic breast cancer- a qualitative study in four European countries.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Rachel HirscheySchool of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.ORCID 0000-0001-8358-0650
Ashley Leak BryantSchool of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Catherine MacekSchool of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Claudio BattagliniDepartment of Exercise and Sport Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Sheila SantacroceSchool of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Kerry S CourneyaFaculty of Kinesiology, Sport, and Recreation, University of Alberta.
Jennifer S WalkerHealth Sciences Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Aya AvishaiDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Paschal SheeranDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North, Carolina at Chapel Hill.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USUniversity of Alberta · CA

Funding

INTERVENTIONS FOR PREVENTING &MANAGING CHRONIC ILLNESST32NR007091 · NINR · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Cheryl L Giscombe, Cathi Barbra Propper · 1996 to 2026
$11.8M
Lineberger Cancer Outcomes Research ProgramNINR NIH HHS T32 NR007091
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe conducted meta-analyses and meta-analytic structural equation modeling of longitudinal studies among cancer survivors to (a) quantify associations between psychosocial predictors and physical activity, (b) test how psychosocial predictors combine to influence physical activity, and (c) identify study, demographic, and clinical characteristics that moderate associations.

methodEligible studies used a longitudinal, observational design, included a sample of cancer survivors, and measured both a psychosocial predictor at baseline and physical activity at a later time-point. Of 2,431 records located through computerized searches, 25 independent tests (N = 5,897) met the inclusion criteria for the review. Random effects meta-analyses and meta-analytic structural equation modeling were conducted.

resultsEight psychosocial predictors of physical activity were identified. Self-efficacy (r+ = 0.26) and intentions (r+ = 0.33) were the strongest predictors in bivariate analyses. The structural equation models included attitudes, injunctive norms, self-efficacy, intentions, and physical activity (k = 22, N = 4,385). The model with the best fit, χ2(2) = 0.11, p = .95, root mean square error of approximation = .00, comparative fit index = 1.00, Tucker-Lewis index = 1.00, indicated that all specified paths were significant. Intentions were the strongest predictor of physical activity (β = 0.27, p < .001), and attitudes and self-efficacy were strong predictors of intentions (both βs = 0.29, ps < .001). Few significant moderators were observed.

conclusionThis review indicates that self-efficacy and intentions are direct predictors of physical activity in cancer survivors. Further, attitudes and norms predict physical activity through intentions. Findings inform intervention development to increase physical activity engagement among cancer survivors. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsExerciseFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMale

Identifiers

PMID32011152
PMCPMC7203971
OpenAlexW3004781029

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.