ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2026
Efficacy of traditional Chinese exercise on postoperative rehabilitation in lung cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pulmonary rehabilitation plays a crucial role in lung cancer patients after surgery. In this context, traditional Chinese exercises (TCEs) are being increasingly utilized. However, the existing studies are characterized by small sample sizes, inconsistent interventions, and diverse outcome measures, which result in high heterogeneity and limited clinical applicability. This meta-analysis systematically assessed the impacts of two common TCEs on postoperative lung cancer patients, aiming to provide a basis for evidence-based rehabilitation strategies. Methods: A systematic search of nine electronic databases was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to November 3, 2025. After independent screening, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment, meta-analysis was performed. Results: Twenty-five RCTs involving 1,834 participants were included. The meta-analysis demonstrated that TCE significantly improved pulmonary function outcomes, including forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), FEV1/FVC ratio, and FEV1% predicted. Additionally, TCE increased the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) and quality of life (QoL) score. Regarding psychological outcomes, TCE significantly alleviated symptoms of anxiety. TCE showed no statistically significant effect on postoperative fatigue, Borg dyspnea scores and depression in lung cancer patients. Subgroup analyses suggested that timing of intervention initiation and settings may account for the observed heterogeneity in respiratory function outcomes. Furthermore, subgroup showed that Liuzijue was more effective than Baduanjin in improving FEV1/FVC (mean difference: 4.88 Conclusions: TCE appears to be a beneficial intervention for enhancing pulmonary function, QoL, and mental health in postoperative lung cancer patients. However, further-quality studies are warranted to confirm the robustness of these findings due to limitations in certain outcome measures.
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.