Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38784387›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of public health2024

Social Representativeness and Intervention Adherence-A Systematic Review of Clinical Physical Activity Trials in Breast Cancer Patients.

Ragna Stalsberg, Monica Dahle Darvik

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Ragna StalsbergDepartment of Circulation and Medical Imaging, Norwegian University of Technology and Science (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway.
Monica Dahle DarvikDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian University of Technology and Science (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Representativeness in physical activity randomised controlled trials (RCT) in breast cancer patients is essential to analyses of feasibility and validity considering privileged- social groups. A step-by-step exclusion of less privileged groups through the trial process could reinforce health inequality. This study aimed at examining representativeness in breast cancer (BC) physical activity trials, investigate associations between socio-economic status (SES) and intervention adherence, and explore associations between representativeness and the relationship between SES and intervention adherence. Methods: Systematic, computerised searches were performed in PubMed, CINAHL, AMED, EMBASE and PsycINFO. Additional citation-based searches retrieved 37 articles. Distributions of education level, ethnicity, and marital status in study samples were compared to national populations data to estimate representativeness in less privileged groups. Results: A preponderance of studies favoured educated, married and white patients. Only six studies reported SES-adherence associations, hampering conclusions on this relationship and possible associations between representativeness and an SES-adherence relationship. Conclusion: Less educated, unmarried and non-white individuals may be underrepresented in BC physical activity RCTs, while SES-adherence associations in such trials are inconclusive. Unintentional social misrepresentations may indicate that disguised inequity warrants revived attention.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsExerciseRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicFemaleHumansPatient ComplianceSocial ClassSocioeconomic Factorsbreast cancerexercise trialsmammae cancermeta-analysisresearch equitysampling biassocial validity

Identifiers

PMID38784387
PMCPMC11111874

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.