SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2026
Wearable technologies for perioperative recovery monitoring in lung cancer surgery: a systematic review of feasibility, recovery outcomes, and evidence certainty.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways in thoracic oncology emphasize early mobilization and objective discharge readiness, but perioperative functional recovery is often assessed intermittently. Wearable devices may provide continuous, objective recovery metrics. Methods: We conducted a PRISMA 2020-based systematic review registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261325339). PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched for English-language studies published between February 2, 1996 and February 2, 2026. Eligible reports included adults undergoing lung cancer surgery or clinically relevant pulmonary resection and evaluated wearable-based activity, physiologic monitoring, or rehabilitation support across the preoperative, in-hospital, or post-discharge phases. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2, ROBINS-I, or design-appropriate feasibility and measurement appraisal. Certainty of evidence was qualitatively informed by GRADE principles, and findings were synthesized narratively because of clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Results: Eight reports representing seven independent cohorts were included: two randomized trials, one nonrandomized trial with historical controls, two prospective observational studies, two companion single-arm preoperative feasibility/effectiveness reports, and one development/usability agreement study. In the Move For Surgery RCT, wearable-enhanced preconditioning reduced prolonged hospital stay >5 days from 24% to 7% (12/50 vs 3/45; Conclusions: Wearable-based perioperative monitoring appears feasible and may provide objective recovery signals in lung cancer surgery. However, current evidence remains sparse, heterogeneous, and often indirect. Findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating rather than sufficient to support routine clinical implementation. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261325339, identifier CRD420261325339.
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.