ArticlePloS one2023
A qualitative evaluation of a multi-modal cancer prehabilitation programme for colorectal, head and neck and lung cancers patients.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prehabilitation for cancer surgery: a systematic review of qualitative literature from experienced stakeholders.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Access, acceptance and adherence to cancer prehabilitation: a mixed-methods systematic review.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2025Pooled it
- The use of technology in cancer prehabilitation: a systematic review.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
- The Acceptability and Experiences of Participating in a Preoperative Intentional Weight-Loss Programme From Diagnosis to Surgery for Colorectal Cancer.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Trial
- Prehabilitation Prior to Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Impact and Implementation.Journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of digitally delivered multimodal prehabilitation for cancer patients: A mixed-methods systematic review.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Prehabilitation for lumbar spinal stenosis: understanding mechanisms and contexts for enhanced engagement-a realist review.Age and ageing · 2025Review
- The inequalities and challenges of prehabilitation before cancer surgery: a narrative review.Anaesthesia · 2025Review
- Co-developing a theory of change for a personalised multimodal cancer prehabilitation programme in South Wales.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Health professionals' perceptions of prehabilitation before haematopoietic cell transplantation to optimise candidacy in older adults.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- Prehabilitation in Adults Undergoing Cancer Surgery: A Comprehensive Review on Rationale, Methodology, and Measures of Effectiveness.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGrowing evidence indicates patients' survivorship outcomes can be enhanced through active engagement in a multi-modal cancer prehabilitation programme (MCPP), although this intervention is not uniformly embedded as a standard of care. MCPP aims to optimise patients physiologically and psychologically for cancer treatments, shorten recovery time, reduce complications, promote healthier lifestyles and improve quality of life. South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust (SET) developed and evaluated a system-wide collaborative approach to MMCP across three tumour groups (colorectal, lung, head and neck cancer). Addressing the lack of qualitative evaluation of MCPPs, this novel paper explores mechanisms promoting feasibility and acceptability of MCPP from patients' and interdisciplinary professionals' perspectives.
methodsSemi-structured virtual one-to-one interviews were conducted with 24 interdisciplinary professionals and nine patients. Transcripts were recorded, transcribed verbatim and themes developed using Framework Analysis.
resultsAnalysis of findings identified three themes providing an in-depth understanding of key elements required to develop and promote system-wide delivery of a MCPP: 1) Equipping the team: Capability and capacity, 2) Timing of intervention and delivery timeframe and 3) Systems and processes.
conclusionThe system-wide collaborative approach to developing a MCPP was deemed both feasible and acceptable. Success was attributed to visionary leadership, alongside a diverse group of interdisciplinary professionals being engaged, motivated and committed to intervention delivery in an effort to improve patient outcomes. Iterative, responsive troubleshooting during initial delivery is required to facilitate successful implementation. Further training is required for greater adherence to provision of prescriptive high intensity exercise within the programme, which may further promote enhanced patient outcomes. To enable sustainability of MCPP, ongoing training for professionals and funding is required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.