ArticleBMJ open2025
Non-pharmacological therapies for quality of life in women with breast cancer: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBreast cancer (BC) is the most frequently diagnosed cancer worldwide. Both the disease itself and the side effects of its treatments significantly impair the quality of life (QoL) of women with BC. Non-pharmacological therapies (NPTs), including exercise therapies, mindfulness-based interventions, cognitive therapies, acupoint therapies, and other complementary therapies, are increasingly being employed to improve the QoL for women with BC. However, the effects and acceptability of NPTs may vary depending on the treatment phases (intra-treatment and post-treatment) of the women with BC. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to compare the effects and acceptability of NPTs among women with BC across different treatment phases.
methodsRelevant randomised controlled trials will be systematically searched in 7 databases, including the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Biomedical Literature Database, and Wanfang, covering the period from their inception to February 2025. Two researchers will independently assess the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomised Trials 2.0. The network meta-analysis will be conducted using STATA 16.0. The assessments of heterogeneity, inconsistency, publication bias, evidence quality and sensitivity analysis will also be conducted. The subgroup network meta-analysis will be conducted based on the treatment phases of women with BC. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol does not need approval from an ethics committee, as it is conducted based on previous research data. The results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42023476312.
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.