SynthesisBlood advances2026
Supportive care interventions in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Blood advances, 2026. 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
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
abstractThere is no comprehensive synthesis of supportive care interventions for patients with hematologic malignancies receiving transplantation and cellular therapies (TCTs). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to characterize randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of TCT supportive care interventions and examine effects on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0. Findings were grouped by intervention and PRO type and synthesized narratively, with exploratory random-effects meta-analyses estimating pooled intervention effects on anxiety, depression, and quality of life (QOL). Fifty-three RCTs (1992-2025) met inclusion criteria. The search yielded only RCTs of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients, although we included all transplantation and cellular therapies. Studies varied in sample size (11-711), participant demographics (mean age, 33-63 years; 22%-64% women), and PROs. There were 9 intervention categories: cognitive behavioral (n = 5), exercise only (n = 17), expressive helping (n = 2), mind-body/stress management (n = 7), multimodal (exercise plus another modality; n = 6), music/art (n = 12), palliative care (n = 2), positive psychology (n = 1), and self-management/self-efficacy (n = 5). Interventions were mostly feasible and acceptable, with promising improvements in psychological distress, QOL, and physical outcomes. Meta-analysis showed nonsignificant trends toward exercise interventions improving QOL (standardized mean differences [SMD], 0.09) and music/art interventions reducing acute depressive symptoms (SMD, -0.26). Among patients undergoing HSCT for hematologic malignancies, supportive care interventions show feasibility, acceptability, and promise for improving PROs. However, larger, rigorously designed RCTs using standardized PRO measures are needed to establish efficacy.
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.