TABLE 11.

Other relations reported between patient characteristics and outcome variables

Baseline characteristics/co‐morbidities	No difference in improvement of outcome by age (Henry et al., 2018) Younger (<56) participants had larger effect on fatigue (Spahrkäs et al., 2020b; Willems, Mesters, et al., 2017) Baseline levels of fatigue (Owen et al., 2017), demographic/clinical variables (Smith et al., 2019; Zernicke et al., 2016) and education and cancer status (Spahrkäs et al., 2020b) were no predictors of outcome on fatigue
Outcome variables	Fatigue was correlated with depression (Willems, Lechner, et al., 2017) and sitting time (Delrieu, Pialoux, et al., 2020) Change in self‐efficacy score was associated with fatigue symptoms (Smith et al., 2019) Clinically significant improvement is predicted by (Yun et al., 2012): Being moderately to severely fatigued Having sleep problems at baseline Having comorbidities at baseline More evident effect of intervention is seen with (Yun et al., 2012): Lower Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) severity score Higher sleep quality index I and II score
Adherence	Effect on fatigue was found when users used the module fatigue (Willems, Bolman, et al., 2017) Number of cores completed was not associated with improvement in fatigue (Zachariae et al., 2018) High/medium users had more reduction in fatigue than low/non users (Spahrkäs et al., 2020b)