↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy of exercise interventions for women during and after gynaecological cancer treatment – a systematic scoping review

Overview of attention for article published in Supportive Care in Cancer, May 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Efficacy of exercise interventions for women during and after gynaecological cancer treatment – a systematic scoping review
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer, May 2023
DOI 10.1007/s00520-023-07790-8
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To systematically synthesise evidence of exercise intervention efficacy for physical/psychosocial outcomes that matter to women during/following treatment for gynaecological cancer. Five databases were searched (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsychInfo, Scopus). Exercise-only intervention studies that included women during/ following treatment for any gynaecological cancer, with/ without control comparison, on any physical or psychosocial outcome(s), were included and qualitatively appraised using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Seven randomised controlled trials (RCTs), three single-arm pre-post studies, and one prospective cohort study satisfied were included (11 studies). Most studies were completed following treatment (91%), included combined (aerobic and resistance; 36%) and aerobic (36%) training, were fully/mostly (63%) unsupervised, and had a moderate-to-high risk of bias. Overall, 33 outcomes (64% objectively-measured) were assessed. Improvements were observed in aerobic capacity (V̇O2 Peak +1.6 mL/kg/min, 6-minute walk distance +20-27 m), lower- (30-second sit-to-stand +2-4 repetitions) and upper-limb strength (30-second arm curl +5 repetitions; 1RM grip strength/chest press +2.4-3.1 kg), and agility (timed up-and-go -0.6 seconds). However, changes in quality of life, anthropometry/body composition, balance and flexibility were inconsistent. There was no evidence to support worsening of outcomes. Preliminary research into the role of exercise post-gynaecological cancer suggests an improvement in exercise capacity, muscular strength, and agility which, in the absence of exercise, typically decline following gynaecological cancer. Future exercise trials involving larger and more diverse gynaecological cancer samples will improve understanding of the potential and magnitude of effect of guideline-recommended exercise on outcomes that matter to patients.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 4 6%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Student > Master 4 6%
Professor 2 3%
Researcher 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 44 69%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 47 73%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 19 May 2023.
All research outputs
#13,516,621
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#2,501
of 4,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,289
of 192,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#18
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,764 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 192,901 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.