Arbane 2009.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: RCT Number randomized: 51; 25 to the exercise group and 26 to the control group Study start and stop dates: not reported Length of intervention: 12 weeks Length of follow‐up: to end of the intervention
Participants	Type cancer: lung cancer Time since cancer diagnosis: not reported Time in active treatment: not reported Inclusion criteria: attending thoracotomy for lung cancer Eligibility criteria related to interest or ability, or both, to exercise: none reported Exclusion criteria: none reported Gender: male Current age, mean (range) years: 64 (32 to 82) years Age at cancer diagnosis: not reported Ethnicity/race: not reported Education level: not reported SES: not reported Employment status: not reported Comorbidities: not reported Past exercise history: not reported On hormone therapy: not reported
Interventions	Number of participants assigned to the exercise intervention: not reported. The intervention included: twice daily training plus usual care during hospital stay. After discharge monthly home visits and weekly telephone calls Type exercise (aerobic/anaerobic): unclear Intensity of the experimental exercise intervention: not reported Frequency: twice per day at the clinic and monthly home visits Duration of individual sessions: not reported Duration of exercise program: 12 weeks Total number of exercise sessions: not reported Format: unclear, appears to be individual Facility: unclear Professionally led: not reported Adherence: not reported Number of participants assigned to control group: not reported. The control included: usual care Contamination of control group: not reported
Outcomes	No primary outcome was identified. QoL outcomes included: global HRQoL, assessed using QLQ‐C30 Other outcomes included: quadriceps strength, assessed using magnetic stimulation 6‐minute walking distance Outcomes were measured at baseline 5 days and 12 weeks. The number of participants in groups at time points was not reported Subgroup analysis: none Adverse events: not reported
Notes	Country: UK Funding: none reported Published as abstract
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	The generation of the random sequence was not described
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Whether the 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 the participants
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Allocation to the intervention was not concealed from the study personnel
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Insufficient details provided to determine whether there was any attrition
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient details provided to assess whether there was selective outcome reporting
Other bias	High risk	The small sample size, lack of description of the recruitment and selection of study participants, lack of identification of a primary outcome could give rise to additional biases