Exercise across the Lung Cancer Care Continuum: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

Ref ID 866
First Author L. Edbrooke
Journal JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
Year Of Publishing 2023
URL https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/12/5/1871
Keywords • Risk of bias
• Low methodological quality
• Low reporting quality
• Oncology
• Protocols
• Pre-specification
Problem(s) • Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria
• Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided
• Limited quality assessment or no risk of bias
• Selective reporting of harms / safety / adverse events / side effects
• Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country Australia
Checklists • PRISMA 2020
• AMSTAR 2
Aim To synthesise findings from and evaluate the quality of the current systematic review evidence on the efficacy and safety of exercise for people with both operable and inoperable lung cancer, delivered across the care continuum.
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings From 20 included systematic reviews on the efficacy and safety of exercise for people with both operable and inoperable lung cancer indexed across 8 databases from inception until 21 February 2022. AMSTAR-2 ratings were ‘critically low’ in 22 (73.3%), ‘low’ in 7 (23.3%) and ‘moderate’ in 1 (3.3%) of the included Systematic Reviews. Only nine systematic reviews (30%) provided a list with justification for excluded studies and twenty (66.6%) did not account for individual study risk of bias in interpreting findings. Eighteen of the systematic reviews (60%) did not provide justification for their study design inclusion criteria. Only three systematic reviews, across both operable and inoperable populations, synthesised safety (adverse event) findings and all three reported few adverse events associated with exercise across the lung cancer care continuum.
Number of systematic reviews included 30
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 4114