Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40145635›Full record

SynthesisCancer medicine2025

Comparative Efficacy of Various Exercise Types on Cancer-Related Fatigue for Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Shichen Zhou, Guang Chen, Xiaoyu Xu, Cheng Zhang, Guoming Chen, Yau-Tuen Chan, Ya Xuan Sun, Jiayan Zhou, Ning Wang, Yibin Feng

Abstract readSystematic ReviewComparative StudyNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cancer medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Cancer-related fatigue in cancer survivors: an updated clinical practice review for healthcare providers.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

10 authors.

Shichen ZhouSchool of Chinese Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, P.R. China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-0220-1576
Guang ChenSchool of Chinese Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, P.R. China.
Xiaoyu XuSchool of Chinese Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, P.R. China.
Cheng ZhangSchool of Chinese Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, P.R. China.
Guoming ChenSchool of Chinese Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, P.R. China.
Yau-Tuen ChanSchool of Chinese Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, P.R. China.
Ya Xuan SunT.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Jiayan ZhouSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Ning WangSchool of Chinese Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, P.R. China.
Yibin FengSchool of Chinese Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, P.R. China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0241-670X

Funding

General Research Fund grants from the University Grants Committee of the Hong Kong SAR Government 17121419General Research Fund grants from the University Grants Committee of the Hong Kong SAR Government 17152116Health and Medical Research Fund (HMRF) 15162961Health and Medical Research Fund (HMRF) 16172751Innovation and Technology Fund PRP/029/24FXInnovation and Technology Fund PRP/069/22FX
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study compares the effectiveness of 7 types of guideline-recommended first-line exercises for cancer-related fatigue (CRF).

methodsA comprehensive search was conducted utilizing public databases, including Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Randomized clinical trials examining the effects of aerobic exercise, resistance exercise, stretching exercise, combined aerobic and resistance exercise, Yoga, Qigong, or Tai Chi on CRF in various cancer types were included. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to synthesize the data. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were used to detect the effect modifiers and to confirm the robustness, respectively.

resultsA total of 33 clinical trials were included in this analysis. Overall, both resistance (SMD, -1.72; 95% CI, -2.81 to -0.63) and Yoga (SMD, -1.27; 95% CI, -1.38 to -1.16) reduced the fatigue severity significantly better than standard care, but there was no significant decrease for other exercise types. For cancer survivors with an age over 55 years, only Yoga showed statistically significant improvement in CRF (SMD, -1.27; 95% CI, -1.38 to -1.16). For patients with an age less than 55 years, both resistance (SMD, -1.75; 95% CI, -2.91 to -0.58) and Yoga (SMD, -1.66; 95% CI, -2.81 to -0.51) reduced the fatigue severity compared to standard care.

conclusionBoth resistance exercise and yoga showed significant benefits in alleviating CRF compared to standard care. Yoga was particularly effective for cancer survivors over 55 years of age, while resistance exercise and yoga were comparably effective for those under 55 years.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsExerciseExercise TherapyFatigueNeoplasmsHumansQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResistance TrainingTai JiTreatment OutcomeYogacancer‐related fatiguemind–body interventionnetwork meta‐analysisphysical exerciseqigongsystematic reviewtai chiyoga

Identifiers

PMID40145635
PMCPMC11948276

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.