MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2775643704 · doi:10.1097/dcr.0000000000000987

Multimodal Prehabilitation Programs as a Bundle of Care in Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Review

2017· review· en· W2775643704 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vladimir Bolshinsky, Michael H.-G. Li, Hilmy Ismail, Kate Burbury, Bernhard Riedel, Alexander G. Heriot

Bibliographic record

VenueDiseases of the Colon & Rectum · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrehabilitationMedicineRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyCINAHLMEDLINEColorectal surgeryMeta-analysisClinical trialPsychological interventionAbdominal surgerySurgeryInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Prehabilitation reflects a proactive process of preoperative optimization undertaken between cancer diagnosis and definitive surgical treatment, with the intent of improving physiological capacity to withstand the major insult of surgery. Prehabilitation before GI cancer surgery is currently not widely adopted, and most research has focused on unimodal interventions such as exercise therapy, nutritional supplementation, and hematinic optimization. A review of the existing literature was undertaken to investigate the impact of multimodal prehabilitation programs as a "bundle of care." DATA SOURCE: A systematic literature search was performed utilizing Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cinahl, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases. STUDY SELECTION: The quality of studies was assessed by using the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias (randomized trials) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment scale (cohort studies). INTERVENTION: Studies were chosen that involved pre-operative optimization of patients before GI cancer surgery. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome measured was the impact of prehabilitation programs on preoperative fitness and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 544 studies identified, 20 were included in the qualitative analysis. Two trials investigated the impact of multimodal prehabilitation (exercise, nutritional supplementation, anxiety management). Trials exploring prehabilitation with unimodal interventions included impact of exercise therapy (7 trials), impact of preoperative iron replacement (5 trials), nutritional optimization (5 trials), and impact of preoperative smoking cessation (2 trials). Compliance within the identified studies was variable (range: 16%-100%). LIMITATIONS: There is a lack of adequately powered trials that utilize objective risk stratification and uniform end points. As such, a meta-analysis was not performed because of the heterogeneity in study design. CONCLUSION: Although small studies are supportive of multimodal interventions, there are insufficient data to make a conclusion about the integration of prehabilitation in GI cancer surgery as a bundle of care. Larger, prospective trials, utilizing uniform objective risk stratification and structured interventions, with predefined clinical and health economic end points, are required before definitive value can be assigned to prehabilitation programs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.661

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.353 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations163
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiseases of the Colon & RectumSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207