MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411203673 · doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000878

The impact of mind-body internet and mobile-based interventions on fatigue in adults living with chronic physical conditions: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2025· review· en· W4411203673 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Digital Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMitacs
KeywordsPsychological interventionRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisPsychologyThe InternetPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical activityApplied psychologyMedicineGerontologyPsychotherapistClinical psychologyPsychiatryComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic physical conditions (CPCs) are conditions that persist for long periods and may not have a cure. Fatigue is a common symptom experienced by people living with CPCs. Mind-body internet and mobile-based interventions (IMIs) offer an accessible management strategy. The objective of this review was to assess the impact of mind-body IMIs on fatigue symptoms in adults with CPCs. Six databases were searched from inception to July 2024. Inclusion required randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of mind-body IMIs in adults (≥ 18) with CPCs that assessed fatigue pre-and post-intervention using self-report questionnaires. The primary outcome was the standardized mean fatigue change scores (Hedges' g). Sub-group analyses were conducted on CPC type, mind-body technique, fatigue questionnaire, and personnel support level. Meta-regression was performed on IMI length and age. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. The search retrieved 5239 studies. Seventeen studies met inclusion criteria: 47% neurological (n = 8), 29% cancer (n = 5), and 24% autoimmune (n = 4). Seven studies (41%) included cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), seven used CBT combined with non-CBT techniques, and three employed non-CBT techniques. Mind-body IMIs led to significant reductions in fatigue (SMD = -0.74 [-1.09, -0.39]; p < 0.0001), with a greater effect in younger participants (p = 0.005). Heterogeneity was moderate to high. In conclusion, mind-body IMIs show promise in reducing fatigue symptoms in adults with CPCs. Further high-quality RCTs, expanding beyond CBT techniques, and using at least one common fatigue scale across conditions, would be helpful in evaluating the impact of IMIs across a broader range of CPCs.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.293
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0340.011
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.360 · 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