CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 278Cancer survivorship and careCancer Risks and FactorsWomen's cancer prevention and management

Exercise for women receiving adjuvant therapy for breast cancer

Open access
Furmaniak, Anna C, Menig, Matthias, Markes, Martina H·2016·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005001.pub3
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Main resultsFor this 2015 update we included a total of 32 studies with 2626 randomised women, 8 studies from the original search and 24 studies from the updated search.We found evidence that physical exercise during adjuvant treatment for breast cancer probably improves physical fitness (SMD 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to 0.59; 15 studies; 1310 women; moderate-quality evidence) and slightly reduces fatigue (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.16; 19 studies; 1698 women; moderate-quality evidence).Exercise may lead to little or no improvement in health-related quality of life (MD 1.10, 95% CI -5.28 to 7.48; 1 study; 68 women; low-quality evidence), a slight improvement in cancer site-specific quality of life (MD 4.24, 95% CI -1.81 to 10.29; 4 studies; 262 women; low-quality evidence), and an improvement in cognitive function (MD -11.55, 95% CI -22.06 to -1.05; 2 studies; 213 women; low-quality evidence).Exercise probably leads to little or no difference in cancer-specific quality of life (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.25; 12 studies; 1012 women; moderate-quality evidence) and little or no difference in depression (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.01; 5 studies; 674 women; moderate-quality evidence).Evidence for other outcomes ranged from low to moderate quality.Seven trials reported a very small number of adverse events.Importantly, physical exercise did not harm most women.Very few women experienced discomfort or pain in their arms or legs. What does this mean?Exercise for women receiving adjuvant therapy for breast cancer (Review)

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd005001.pub3

Cites

193 of 193 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Between-group baseline differences that may affect the outcome, less than 75% adherence in the intervention group, and contamination in the control group were considered high risk of other sources of bias.

    “We considered studies with between-group baseline differences that may affect the outcome, less than 75% adherence in the intervention group, and contamination in the control group (i.e., control group participants engaged in exercise), as high risk of ‘other sources of bias’ [29].”

    From Exercise, or exercise and diet for the management of polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2019) · cites this paper as [29]

    The review’s “Other potential sources of bias” section rates inadequate group similarity at baseline as high risk, and “Adherence and contamination” reports high risk from sufficiently low adherence and high contamination. However, our copy does not state a 75% adherence cutoff, and it does not classify every instance of control-group exercise as high-risk contamination. No page numbers are available in the indexed passages. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

5 of the 198 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Wang 2010 {published data only} Wang YJ. Effects of a six-week home-based walking program on Taiwanese women newly diagnosed with early stage breast cancer [PhD thesis]. Buffalo, USA: State University of New York at Buffalo, 2010:143.
  2. Wilkie DJ, Schwartz AL, Huang H-Y, Ko N-Y, Liao W-C, Hairabedian D, et al. Innovations in Cancer Communication. Proceedings of the American Public Health Association, 131st Annual Meeting; 2003 Nov 15-19; San Francisco. San Francisco: American Public Health Association, 2003.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Furmaniak, A. C., Menig, M., & Markes, M. H.
Affiliations
  • University of Bonn (DE)
  • Federal Office of Public Health (CH)
  • Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (DE)
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-09-21
Volume
2016
Issue
9
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
DOI
10.1002/14651858.cd005001.pub3
OpenAlex
W4319293029
Cited by
276
References
198
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 16 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Breast Cancer Foundation
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Risks and Factors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
Keywords
physical activity, breast cancer, adjuvant therapy, physical fitness, fatigue, health-related quality of life, cognitive function, depression, adverse events

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review