Blank 2005.

Methods	Study design: single‐centre RCT Number randomised: 18; 9 to intervention, 9 to control Study start, not reported; stop date, not reported Length of intervention: 8 weeks Length of follow‐up: to end of intervention Country: USA
Participants	Age: Ages 48 to 69 years Stage: Stage I‐III breast cancer Inclusion criteria: • Minimum of 8 weeks post chemotherapy • Oestrogen receptor positive status • Surgery for lumpectomy, modified mastectomy, or full mastectomy (with/without reconstruction) • Life expectancy greater than 6 months • Adequate blood cell counts and kidney, liver, and cardiac function • Physical and mental ability to attend all yoga training sessions Exclusion criteria: • Receiving Herceptin therapy, current steroid therapy, or other known immunomodulating medications • Pregnancy or current lactation • Past or current history of another neoplasm, active serious infection, or immune deficiency • Documented alcohol or drug abuse • History of psychiatric disorders requiring use of psychotropic medications
Interventions	9 participants assigned to exercise intervention: Beginning level Iyengar yoga class 3 times per week (2 supervised and 1 home‐based). Attention to alignment and symmetry, use of props, and careful sequencing all improve stamina, strength, flexibility, and confidence, while decreasing stress and side effects. Adherence: not reported 9 participants assigned to control: Wait‐list control
Outcomes	Outcomes: 31‐Question self‐report survey about reasons for participation, feelings of stress, level of physical and mental effort during class sessions, and perceptions about how yoga practice influenced awareness Numbers of participants assessed: Intervention: at 6 weeks, 9 Control: at 6 weeks, 9 Adverse events: not reported
Notes	Trial registration link: none available Trial authors contacted: no Intention‐to‐treat analysis: unclear Funding: not reported
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	"Women were randomized", but it was unclear how the allocation sequence was generated.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Whether treatment assignment was concealed from study personnel and participants was not described.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Owing to the nature of the intervention, it was not possible to conceal allocation to the intervention from participants.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Blinding of outcome assessments was not described.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	It is unclear how many participants were included in each outcome assessment.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	Outcome measures were poorly described and reported. Scores for each question were not reported.
Other bias	High risk	Outcomes were not assessed at baseline, so it was not possible to assess whether outcomes changed as a result of intervention.