12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Understanding acceptability of and engagement with Web-based interventions aiming to improve quality of life in cancer survivors: A synthesis of current research

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Critical appraisal skills programme

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Exercise interventions for cancer survivors: a meta-analysis of quality of life outcomes.

            Exercise improves quality of life (QOL) in cancer survivors, although characteristics of efficacious exercise interventions for this population have not been identified. The present meta-analysis examines the efficacy of exercise interventions in improving QOL in cancer survivors, as well as features that may moderate such effects. Studies were identified and coded, and QOL effect sizes were calculated and analyzed for trends. Overall, exercise interventions increased QOL, but this tendency depended to some extent on exercise and patient features. Although several features were associated with effect sizes, models revealed that interventions were particularly successful if they targeted more intense aerobic exercise and addressed women. These tendencies emerged over longer periods of time and were more prominent in studies with higher methodological quality. Appropriately designed exercise interventions enhance QOL for cancer survivors and this pattern is especially evident for women. Limitations are discussed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Time to rethink the systematic review catechism? Moving from ‘what works’ to ‘what happens’

              Systematic review methods are developing rapidly, and most researchers would recognise their key methodological aspects, such as a closely focussed question, a comprehensive search, and a focus on synthesising ‘stronger’ rather than ‘weaker’ evidence. However, it may be helpful to question some of these underlying principles, because while they work well for simpler review questions, they may result in overly narrow approaches to more complex questions and interventions. This commentary discusses some core principles of systematic reviews, and how they may require further rethinking, particularly as reviewers turn their attention to increasingly complex issues, where a Bayesian perspective on evidence synthesis, which would aim to assemble evidence - of different types, if necessary - in order to inform decisions’, may be more productive than the ‘traditional’ systematic review model. Among areas identified for future research are the examination of publication bias in qualitative research; research on the efficiency and potential biases of comprehensive searches in different disciplines; and the use of Bayesian methods in evidence synthesis. The incorporation of a systems perspective into systematic reviews is also an area which needs rapid development.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Psycho-Oncology
                Psycho-Oncology
                Wiley-Blackwell
                10579249
                January 2018
                January 21 2018
                : 27
                : 1
                : 22-33
                Article
                10.1002/pon.4566
                © 2018

                Comments

                Comment on this article