Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40119984›Full record

ReviewJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2025

Feasibility, safety, and adherence of home-based exercise interventions in people diagnosed with cancer: a systematic review.

Jing Jing Su, Petr Winnige, Katerina Chamradova, Filip Dosbaba, Katerina Batalikova, Rose Lin, Varsamo Antoniou, Garyfallia Pepera, Ladislav Batalik

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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.

Jing Jing SuSchool of Nursing, Tung Wah College, Hong Kong, China.
Petr WinnigeDepartment of Rehabilitation, University Hospital Brno, Brno, Czech Republic.
Katerina ChamradovaDepartment of Rehabilitation, University Hospital Brno, Brno, Czech Republic.
Filip DosbabaDepartment of Rehabilitation, University Hospital Brno, Brno, Czech Republic.
Katerina BatalikovaDepartment of Rehabilitation, University Hospital Brno, Brno, Czech Republic.
Rose LinElaine Hubbard Center for Nursing Research On Aging, School of Nursing, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
Varsamo AntoniouClinical Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation Research Laboratory, Physiotherapy Department, School of Health Sciences, University of Thessaly, Lamia, Greece.
Garyfallia PeperaClinical Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation Research Laboratory, Physiotherapy Department, School of Health Sciences, University of Thessaly, Lamia, Greece.
Ladislav BatalikDepartment of Rehabilitation, University Hospital Brno, Brno, Czech Republic. batalik.ladislav@fnbrno.cz.

Funding

Ministerstvo Zdravotnictví Ceské Republiky NU23-09-00048
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis systematic review aims to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and adherence of home-based exercise interventions in people diagnosed with cancer. The primary research question is: Are home-based exercise interventions safe and feasible for people diagnosed with cancer?

methodsA comprehensive search of databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library was conducted in January 2025, focusing on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that involved home-based exercise interventions people diagnosed with cancer. Studies were included if they reported on safety, feasibility, and health-related outcomes. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale was used to assess study quality and risk of bias. Adverse events were categorized by severity, and feasibility which was determined based on recruitment, withdrawal, and adherence rates.

resultsFrom 127 eligible studies involving 10,562 participants, the review found that home-based exercise interventions are generally safe, with less than 3.2% of participants experiencing exercise-related adverse events, most of which were minor. Feasibility was supported by an average recruitment rate of 50.1%, which was calculated as the proportion of eligible participants who consented to participate across the included studies. Additionally, the review found a withdrawal rate of 13.7%, and an adherence rate of 76.2%. However, significant variability in these rates were observed across the studies, highlighting the challenges in maintaining participant engagement.

conclusionsHome-based exercise interventions are feasible and safe for people diagnosed with cancer, with minor adverse events being the most common. However, there is a need for standardized protocols in reporting adverse events and better strategies to improve recruitment and adherence. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: These findings support the integration of home-based exercise into standard cancer care, offering a practical and safe option for enhancing the health and well-being of cancer survivors. However, the successful implementation of these programs may require additional support from exercise professionals within primary care or community settings to ensure appropriate guidance and adherence. Personalized exercise programs, developed by qualified exercise professionals such as physiotherapists or clinical exercise physiologists, and improved reporting standards are essential to optimizing these interventions.

Indexed as

AdherenceAdverse eventsCancer survivorsFeasibilityHome-based exercisePhysical activitySafety

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.