Cancer-related fatigue: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of mind-body intervention

摘要

Objectives. This study aimed to evaluate the methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of mind-body interventions (MBIs) for the management of cancer-related fatigue. Methods. A comprehensive search on multiple databases was conducted to identify relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses published from January 2008 to December 2019. Two authors independently selected reviews, extracted data, and evaluated the methodological quality of included reviews using Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). Results. Sixteen reviews published between 2010 and 2018 were eligible for inclusion. The methodological quality of the 16 included systematic reviews was moderate (score 4-7) to high (score ≥8) on the 11-point AMSTAR scale. The most common methodological weaknesses were the lack of a list of excluded studies (n = 15, 93.8%) and a priori protocol (n = 2,87.5%). Furthermore, most of the systematic reviews did not search the gray literature for eligible studies (n = 13, 81.3%). Significance of the study. This study has revealed the need for high methodological quality systematic reviews on the MBIs for the management of cancer-related fatigue. Thus, further research should focus on methodologically strong systematic reviews by providing a priori design, not limiting the publication type, and providing an excluded primary studies list. Additionally, the researchers should conduct systematic reviews according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline.