ArticleJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2025
Community readiness and feasibility of the Exercising Together
Article 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. 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRural cancer survivors living with poverty and their partners have poorer health outcomes than their urban-dwelling counterparts and encounter barriers to implementing health behaviors that can improve quality of life. We investigated the readiness of geographically underserved (rural with high or persistent poverty) counties in Oregon to engage in health-related research to inform the subsequent conduct of a pilot study to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a live-remote, supervised dyadic exercise program (Exercising Together
methodsWe conducted a community readiness assessment in five geographically underserved Oregon counties and calculated their readiness scores on a scale from 1 (no awareness) to 9 (professionalization). The pilot study recruited breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer survivors and their intimate partners living in these five counties. Participants were assigned to one of two resistance training programs (ET or unsupervised, home-based exercise) for 6 months. Feasibility was assessed by study accrual and retention, completion of surveys and testing visits, intervention adherence, and safety. Participants completed a post-intervention acceptability survey, performance testing, and patient-reported outcomes at 0, 6, and 12 months.
resultsReadiness for health-related research varied but was low overall (2.7, denial/resistance, to 5.2, preparation). The pilot study enrolled 11 couples (31% accrual), with 73% residing in the highest readiness county. The study had high retention in the ET arm (93%) and high data completeness (surveys, 98%; performance testing visits, 96%), intervention adherence (ET, 93%; unsupervised, home-based exercise, 83%), and safety in both the ET and unsupervised, home-based exercise arms. ET received higher overall experience ratings than unsupervised, home-based exercise, and both survivors and partners in ET experienced large effect-size improvements in physical performance and smaller improvements in some patient-reported outcomes after the exercise program.
conclusionDelivering exercise via live-remote classes could address health disparities for rural cancer survivors by increasing access to supervised, evidence-based programs. Since readiness scores were aligned with pilot study enrollment, future studies should prioritize activating low-readiness counties to increase participation in exercise interventions for couples coping with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Live-remote exercise classes may increase access to supervised, evidence-based programs for rural cancer survivors.
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.