Chang 2008.
Study characteristics | ||
Methods | Study design: RCT Number randomized: 24; 12 to the exercise group and 12 to the control group Study start and stop dates: not reported Length of intervention: 3 weeks Length of follow‐up: to end of the intervention |
|
Participants | Type cancer: AML Time since cancer diagnosis: not reported Time in active treatment: not reported Inclusion criteria:
Eligibility criteria related to interest or ability, or both, to exercise:
Exclusion criteria:
Gender, n (%):
Current age, mean (SD) 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 | 12 participants assigned to the exercise intervention, including:
Type exercise (aerobic/anaerobic): aerobic Intensity of the experimental exercise intervention: target HR = resting + 30 Frequency: 5 days per week Duration of individual sessions: 12 minutes Duration of exercise program: 3 weeks Total number of exercise sessions: 15 sessions Format: individual Facility: hospital Professionally led by an Masters‐prepared nurse research assistant, who accompanied patient on walk Adherence: not reported 12 participants assigned to control group, including:
Contamination of control group: not reported |
|
Outcomes | No primary outcome was identified. QoL outcomes included:
Outcomes were measured at baseline, 1 week, 2 weeks, and 3 weeks:
Subgroup analysis: none Adverse events: not reported |
|
Notes | Country: Taiwan Funding: none reported |
|
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 | High risk | 1 participant from the exercise group and 1 from the control group were not included in any analyses |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | There is no evidence of selective reporting of outcomes |
Other bias | Low risk | The trial appears to be free of other problems that could put it at a high risk of bias |