Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40080513›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Exploring prehabilitation interventions for patients with gynaecological cancer undergoing radiotherapy: A scoping review.

Elizabeth McGladrigan, Elizabeth Wrench, Ewan Dean, Aneurin O'Neil, Lisa Ashmore, Christopher Gaffney

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors.

Elizabeth McGladriganLancaster Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, Lancashire, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-8161-8585
Elizabeth WrenchLancaster Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, Lancashire, United Kingdom.
Ewan DeanLancaster Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, Lancashire, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-5615-5850
Aneurin O'NeilUK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster, Lancashire, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3591-1034
Lisa AshmoreLancaster Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, Lancashire, United Kingdom.
Christopher GaffneyLancaster Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, Lancashire, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRadiotherapy imposes a significant physiological and psychological burden on gynaecological cancer patients. Prehabilitation is being increasingly used to prepare individuals for cancer treatment and improve their well-being and resilience. Whilst prehabilitation has demonstrated benefit for individuals undergoing cancer surgery, the structure, role and implementation of prehabilitation prior to radiotherapy are poorly defined and relatively unexplored. This scoping review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current literature regarding prehabilitation interventions for individuals with gynaecological cancer undergoing radiotherapy.

methodsThis review was conducted following the gold-standard Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews. Literature searches were completed in October 2024 across: the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database; British Nursing Index; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature; Cochrane library (Controlled trials and systematic reviews); Embase; Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online; and the Psychological Information Database. Grey literature searches were conducted via Google Scholar, Overton.io, and Trip Pro Medical Database.

resultsNinety records met the inclusion criteria, pertaining to 56 studies. Cervical cancer was the most represented gynaecological cancer type across studies. A small number of multimodal prehabilitation studies were identified (n = 4). Studies evaluating unimodal interventions were more common, with nutritional interventions (n = 24) being the most frequent, followed by psychological (n = 22) and physical exercise (n = 6) interventions. There was considerable variation across studies in respect to intervention initiation, duration, delivery and outcome measures.

conclusionsThe physiological and psychological impacts of cancer diagnosis and treatment are closely entwined. Further development of multimodal prehabilitation to cohesively address these is an important area for future research. Studies evaluating exercise interventions are relatively unexplored in this patient population and the potential barriers to engagement must be considered. Future research should focus on complete and transparent reporting of interventions, with input from those with lived experience, and adopting a standardised set of outcome measures reported across all trials.

Indexed as

Genital Neoplasms, FemalePreoperative ExerciseFemaleHumans

Identifiers

PMID40080513
PMCPMC11906083

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.