Comparison 1. Trials primarily intended to treat fatigue (intervention versus control).

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Continuous outcomes (subgroup analysis)	6	244	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐1.07 [‐1.93, ‐0.21]
1.1 Pharmacological interventions	4	209	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐1.23 [‐2.40, ‐0.06]
1.2 Non‐pharmacological interventions	2	35	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.68 [‐1.37, 0.02]
2 Continuous outcomes (sensitivity analysis)	6		Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
2.1 Trials with adequate allocation concealment	2	89	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.38 [‐0.80, 0.04]
2.2 Trials with adequate blinding of outcome assessors	4	198	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐1.10 [‐2.31, 0.11]
2.3 Trials using intention‐to‐treat analysis	3	203	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐1.41 [‐2.73, ‐0.09]
2.4 Trials with no difference of baseline fatigue scores between groups	5	161	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐1.22 [‐2.34, ‐0.09]
2.5 Excluding the outlier	6	199	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.49 [‐0.78, ‐0.20]
3 Dichotomous outcomes	1	83	Risk Ratio (IV, Random, 95% CI)	0.89 [0.75, 1.05]