ReviewJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2026
Efficacy of walking or exercise for improving perceived cognitive function in adults during and after cancer therapy: a systematic review and network analysis.
Review in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 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
Abstract
purposeThis study compared and ranked exercise interventions for improving cognitive function in adult patients with cancer.
methodsFour databases were searched from inception to November 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of exercise interventions in adult patients with cancer; the primary outcome was self-reported cognitive function. A frequentist network meta-analysis combined direct and indirect evidence, with interventions ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking area. Study quality and evidence certainty were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.
resultsFifty-six RCTs involving 5297 participants and eight exercise interventions were included. Compared with controls, combined exercise, yoga, high-intensity interval training (HIIT), and walking showed significant benefits. Ranking identified walking and yoga as the most effective interventions, followed by HIIT. Global and local inconsistency tests showed no significant inconsistencies. Sensitivity analyses confirmed robust walking and combined exercise outcomes, whereas yoga and HIIT results were insufficiently stable. Overall evidence quality was low.
conclusionWalking was the most robust and effective intervention for improving self-reported cognitive function. Although yoga and HIIT showed benefits, their efficacy was not robust in sensitivity analyses and should be interpreted cautiously. These findings support prioritizing walking in clinical exercise prescriptions, whereas recommendations for yoga and HIIT require confirmatory evidence. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Walking and yoga may improve self-reported cognitive function in cancer survivors. These low-cost, accessible exercises offer alternatives to pharmacological treatments, and personalized exercise plans may enhance recovery and quality of life.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42518106What 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.