Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35681717›Full record

ArticleCancers2022

Feasibility of Implementing Cancer-Specific Community-Based Exercise Programming: A Multi-Centre Randomized Trial.

Margaret L McNeely, Kirsten Suderman, Janice L Yurick, Kathryn Nishimura, Christopher Sellar, Paula A Ospina, Edith Pituskin, Harold Lau, Jacob C Easaw, Matthew B Parliament and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Margaret L McNeelyDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4376-4847
Kirsten SudermanDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0520-3280
Janice L YurickCross Cancer Institute, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, AB T6G 1Z2, Canada.
Kathryn NishimuraDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G4, Canada.
Christopher SellarDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G4, Canada.
Paula A OspinaDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4582-4233
Edith PituskinDepartment of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2R3, Canada.
Harold LauTom Baker Cancer Centre, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, AB T2N 4N2, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0947-933X
Jacob C EasawDepartment of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2R3, Canada.
Matthew B ParliamentCancer Care Alberta, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, AB T5J 3E4, Canada.
Anil A JoyDepartment of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2R3, Canada.
S Nicole Culos-ReedCumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 4N1, Canada.
Alberta Health Services · CAUniversity of Alberta · CAUniversity of Calgary · CA

Funding

MSI Foundation 2015
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is growing recognition of the importance of reporting preliminary work on the feasibility of a trial. The present study aimed to assess the feasibility of (1) a proposed fitness testing battery, and (2) processes related to the implementation of cancer-specific exercise programming in a community setting. METHODS/

designA randomized controlled implementation feasibility trial was performed in advance of a large-scale implementation study. Eligible participants within 18 months of a cancer diagnosis were randomized to immediate or delayed community-based exercise at YMCA locations in Calgary and Edmonton, Canada for an 8-week period. The primary outcome for the trial was the feasibility of the physical fitness testing battery, defined as a 70% or greater completion rate across the 24-week study period. The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework was used to evaluate processes related to implementation of the exercise program across the two sites.

resultsEighty participants were recruited, 73 (91%) completed the 8-week trial, and 68 (85%) completed the 16- and 24-week follow-ups. Sixty participants (75%) completed the full physical fitness test battery at each time point, and 59 (74%) completed the patient-reported outcome measures. Statistically significant between-group differences were found in favor of the exercise group for functional aerobic capacity, upper and lower extremity strength, and symptoms. Differences were found between the sites, however, in completion rates and processes related to program implementation. DISCUSSION: Findings suggest the need for minor adaptations to the physical fitness battery and outcome measures to better fit the community context. While findings support feasibility, context-specific challenges related to implementation processes were identified.

Indexed as

cancerexerciseimplementationrandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID35681717
PMCPMC9179478
OpenAlexW4281661171

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.