| Title |
Ameliorative effects of Tai Chi on cancer-related fatigue: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Supportive Care in Cancer, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00520-018-4136-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shangjin Song, Jiahui Yu, Yi Ruan, Xuan Liu, Lijuan Xiu, Xiaoqiang Yue |
| Abstract |
This meta-analysis investigated the effectiveness of Tai Chi on cancer-related fatigue (CRF). Nine databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and four Chinese databases) were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of Tai Chi on CRF. The reference lists given in the identified RCTs were also reviewed to identify potentially relevant studies. Six RCTs involving 373 patients were included. The change in short- and long-term CRF (SCRF and LCRF, respectively) was calculated as the change in the mean score for CRF from baseline to the end of intervention period and to the end of post-intervention follow-up, respectively. Pooled results suggested that Tai Chi had a significant positive effect on standard mean difference (i.e., SCRF; SMD = - 0.54; p < 0.0001), but the impact on LCRF remained unclear. Subgroup analyses of SCRF indicated positive effects of Tai Chi among patients with breast (SMD = - 0.81; p < 0.00001) and lung cancer (SMD = - 0.50; p = 0.002), but not prostate cancer (p = 0.98). Tai Chi also had effects on SCRF that were superior to physical exercise and psychological support (SMD = - 0.49 and - 0.84, respectively; both p < 0.05). A longer intervention time (8-12 weeks) benefited SCRF more than a shorter time (SMD = - 1.08 and - 0.36, respectively; both p < 0.05). Tai Chi for more than 8 weeks has short-term ameliorative effects on CRF, especially among patients with breast and lung cancer. Its beneficial effects are superior to physical exercise and psychological support. It remains unclear whether there are long-term benefits, and further study is needed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| Colombia | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 150 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 8% |
| Researcher | 11 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 22 | 15% |
| Unknown | 55 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 26 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 15% |
| Sports and Recreations | 12 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 7% |
| Psychology | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 9% |
| Unknown | 60 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 February 2019.
All research outputs
#13,584,037
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#2,609
of 4,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,233
of 332,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#66
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,643 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.