Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 411

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 119 of the 119 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of social cognitive theory-based physical activity and/or nutrition behavior change interventions for cancer survivors

Open access
Stacey, Fiona G., James, Erica L., Chapman, Kathy, Courneya, Kerry S., Lubans, David R.·2015·Journal of Cancer Survivorship

Abstract

PURPOSE: Little is known about how to improve and create sustainable lifestyle behaviors of cancer survivors. Interventions based on social cognitive theory (SCT) have shown promise. This review examined the effect of SCT-based physical activity and nutrition interventions that target cancer survivors and identified factors associated with their efficacy. METHODS: A systematic search of seven databases identified randomized controlled trials that (i) targeted adult cancer survivors (any point from diagnosis); (ii) reported a primary outcome of physical activity, diet, or weight management; and (iii) included an SCT-based intervention targeting physical activity or diet. Qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis were conducted. Theoretical constructs and intervention characteristics were examined to identify factors associated with intervention efficacy. RESULTS: Eighteen studies (reported in 33 publications) met review inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis (n = 12) revealed a significant intervention effect for physical activity (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.33; P < 0.01). Most studies (six out of eight) that targeted dietary change reported significant improvements in at least one aspect of diet quality. No SCT constructs were associated with intervention effects. There were no consistent trends relating to intervention delivery method or whether the intervention targeted single or multiple behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: SCT-based interventions demonstrate promise in improving physical activity and diet behavior in cancer survivors, using a range of intervention delivery modes. Further work is required to understand how and why these interventions offer promise for improving behavior. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: SCT-based interventions targeting diet or physical activity are safe and result in meaningful changes to diet and physical activity behavior that can result in health improvements.

Overview

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 · 10.1007/s11764-014-0413-z

Cites

119 of 119 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 119 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Review Manager (RevMan). The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark. 2011.
  2. Norris JM, Culos-Reed SN, Carlson LE, Aldous SH. Utilizing the TPB for understanding yoga participation in cancer survivors. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2007;29:S194-S.

Cited by

See all 411

Metadata

Authors
Stacey, F. G., James, E. L., Chapman, K., Courneya, K. S., & Lubans, D. R.
Venue
Journal of Cancer Survivorship
Published
2014-11-29
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
305-338
ISSN
  • 1932-2259 (ISSN-L)
  • 1932-2267
OpenAlex
W1986462132
Cited by
411
References
119
FWCI
2.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A systematic review and meta-analysis of social cognitive theory-based physical activity and/or nutrition behavior change interventions for cancer survivors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11764-014-0413-z
The paper
Stacey, F. G., James, E. L., Chapman, K., Courneya, K. S., & Lubans, D. R. (2015). A systematic review and meta-analysis of social cognitive theory-based physical activity and/or nutrition behavior change interventions for cancer survivors. Journal of Cancer Survivorship. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-014-0413-z

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.