The work was carried out by a team led by Lingling Pan of Tongji University and Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital in Shanghai, together with colleagues from community and pediatric health institutions in the same city. Rather than conducting a new clinical trial, the researchers performed what is known as an evidence summary, a rigorous synthesis designed to retrieve, appraise, and consolidate the highest-quality existing knowledge on a specific clinical question. Their study was registered with the Fudan University Centre for Evidence-based Nursing under registration number ES20258821, and the team searched guideline repositories, professional association websites, trial registries, and major bibliographic databases from their inception through 1 August 2026.

The methodological backbone of the project was the evidence-based nursing framework developed at Fudan University, combined with the 6S evidence pyramid, a hierarchical model that ranks sources of clinical evidence from the most distilled and immediately applicable, such as computerized decision-support systems and evidence summaries, down through syntheses, synopses, studies, and finally primary data. By design, the search prioritized best-practice documents, clinical guidelines, evidence summaries, systematic reviews, expert consensus statements, and randomized controlled trials. This approach reflects a practical reality of modern medicine: clinicians on the ward rarely have time to read hundreds of primary studies, so the most useful products are those that have already filtered and graded the evidence for them.

After screening, thirteen sources made the final cut: six clinical guidelines, three expert consensus statements, and four randomized controlled trials. The guidelines drew on the collective authority of an impressive roster of international bodies, including the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the American College of Sports Medicine, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, the European Society for Medical Oncology, Cancer Care Ontario, the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and the World Cancer Research Fund together with the American Institute for Cancer Research, among many others listed in the analysis. The breadth of this list underscores how far the exercise-oncology field has spread geographically, with contributions from North America, Europe, Australia, and East Asia converging on broadly compatible recommendations.

The thirty-two synthesized evidence statements were organized into six domains that together trace the full arc of an exercise intervention: pre-exercise screening, pre-exercise assessment, monitoring during exercise, indications for stopping exercise, post-exercise evaluation, and the management of chemotherapy-related complications. This architecture matters because it converts a vague encouragement to stay active into an operational clinical pathway. Screening determines whether a patient is an appropriate candidate for exercise at all; assessment establishes baselines for fitness, symptoms, and risk; monitoring protects the patient while activity is underway; clear stopping criteria define the safety boundaries; and post-exercise evaluation closes the loop by measuring what changed and adjusting the plan accordingly.

The technical logic behind each domain is worth unpacking. Pre-exercise screening in oncology typically involves reviewing the cancer diagnosis, treatment regimen, comorbidities, and red-flag symptoms before clearing a patient for activity. Pre-exercise assessment then quantifies the starting point, often using measures of cardiorespiratory fitness, muscle strength, fatigue, and functional capacity, so that an exercise prescription can be individualized. During exercise, monitoring of vital signs, symptoms such as dyspnea or dizziness, and signs of toxicity allows real-time adjustment of intensity. The domain of exercise-cessation indications is particularly critical for lung cancer patients on chemotherapy, whose platelet counts, hemoglobin levels, immune status, and bone integrity can change rapidly between cycles, creating transient windows of elevated risk for bleeding, infection, or fracture.

The fourth randomized controlled trials included in the synthesis provide the causal backbone for these recommendations. Randomized trials remain the gold standard for establishing that an intervention produces benefit rather than mere association, and in the exercise-oncology field they have repeatedly tested structured programs against usual care in patients undergoing systemic therapy. By incorporating four such trials alongside guidelines and consensus documents, the Shanghai team ensured that the evidence summary was not simply a catalog of expert opinion but a graded synthesis in which the strength of each statement reflects the quality of the underlying research. The team also applied formal appraisal instruments referenced in the study, including AGREE II for guidelines, AMSTAR 2 for systematic reviews, and the Critical Appraisal for Summaries of Evidence tool, along with the Joanna Briggs Institute’s FAME criteria, which evaluate each recommendation for its feasibility, appropriateness, meaningfulness, and effectiveness.

Why does this matter clinically? Lung cancer remains one of the most lethal malignancies worldwide, and chemotherapy, whether delivered alone or alongside targeted agents and immunotherapy, imposes a heavy physiological burden. Skeletal muscle wasting, cardiorespiratory deconditioning, cancer-related fatigue, and psychological distress compound one another in a vicious cycle: fatigue discourages activity, inactivity accelerates deconditioning, and deconditioning deepens fatigue. Exercise is one of the few interventions capable of interrupting this loop from multiple directions simultaneously, stimulating muscle protein synthesis, improving aerobic capacity, and, in many trials across cancer types, reducing the severity of treatment-related fatigue. The complication is that lung cancer patients often present with pre-existing impaired lung function, particularly in non-small-cell lung cancer associated with smoking history, which raises the stakes for getting the intensity and monitoring right.

The authors are careful to frame their conclusions in terms of individualization rather than a one-size-fits-all prescription. Implementation, they write, should be tailored according to the strength and applicability of the evidence, the clinical context, the patient’s treatment status, physical capacity, and personal preferences, with ongoing assessment and monitoring throughout. This nuance is essential. A fit sixty-year-old with early-stage disease receiving adjuvant chemotherapy is a very different exercise candidate from a frail patient with extensive disease and metastatic bone lesions, even though both may benefit from some form of structured movement. The six-domain framework gives clinicians a shared vocabulary for making those distinctions systematically instead of improvising.

The study also highlights a gap that the field is only beginning to close. Although exercise oncology has produced robust guidance for breast and colorectal cancers, lung-cancer-specific recommendations have remained fragmented, as the authors note in their background section. By consolidating thirteen sources into a single, registered, and openly accessible evidence summary, the team has given oncologists, rehabilitation specialists, and nurses a practical reference point, and given researchers a clear map of where the evidence is strong and where it still rests on consensus rather than trial data. The work was funded by the Shanghai Anti-Cancer Association, and the article is published open access under a Creative Commons license, meaning that clinicians anywhere, including in low-resource settings where lung cancer burden is rising fastest, can consult the full synthesis without a subscription. For patients wondering whether they should push through treatment or rest through it, the accumulating answer is neither extreme: move, but move under supervision, with screening before, monitoring during, and clear rules for when to stop.

Subject of Research: Evidence-based exercise management for lung cancer patients receiving chemotherapy

Article Title: Summary of best evidence for exercise management in lung cancer patients during chemotherapy

Article References: Pan, L., Chen, X., Hu, Y., Jiang, Q., Wang, L., & Li, Y. (2026). Summary of best evidence for exercise management in lung cancer patients during chemotherapy. BMC Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-026-17059-y

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12885-026-17059-y

Keywords: lung cancer, chemotherapy, exercise management, evidence summary, systematic review, oncology rehabilitation, clinical guidelines, randomized controlled trials, cancer-related fatigue, supportive care, evidence-based nursing, 6S evidence pyramid

The research, spearheaded by a team of dedicated scholars, employed qualitative methodologies to capture the nuanced perspectives of nursing experts. Through in-depth interviews and focus groups, the study probed into the motivations, challenges, and outcomes experienced by nurses engaged in research settings. Such insights are vital, as they highlight the intersection of clinical practice and research, illustrating how nursing professionals can contribute to the advancement of healthcare through their participation in research initiatives.

One of the foremost revelations from this study is the intrinsic motivation that drives nursing professionals to participate in research. Many participants expressed a profound desire to improve patient outcomes and enhance the quality of care through evidence-based practices. This selfless dedication to patient welfare showcases the ethical commitment of nursing professionals, revealing their willingness to engage in research even in the face of challenges, such as limited resources and time constraints.

However, the study also unveiled significant barriers that nursing experts encounter while participating in research outpatient clinics. Time limitations emerged as a primary concern, with many nurses balancing their clinical duties alongside research responsibilities. This delicate juggling act can lead to increased stress and burnout, suggesting a need for institutional support to facilitate a more harmonious relationship between clinical work and research involvement. Addressing these challenges is crucial for fostering a conducive environment that encourages nursing professionals to engage in research without compromising their essential clinical roles.

Another notable finding of the research was the importance of collaboration and communication among multidisciplinary teams in research settings. The participants emphasized that effective communication channels not only enhance the research process but also contribute to a shared understanding of project goals among team members. This collaborative spirit fosters a sense of community and teamwork, which is essential for achieving common objectives and optimizing the impact of research initiated by nursing professionals.

Training and education were also highlighted as critical components in preparing nursing experts for research participation. The study identified a gap in formal training opportunities for nurses regarding research methodologies and processes. Participants expressed a desire for more structured educational programs to equip them with the necessary skills and knowledge for effective research involvement. By addressing this educational gap, healthcare institutions can ensure that nursing professionals are adequately prepared to contribute to research efforts, ultimately benefiting the broader healthcare community.

Moreover, the findings suggest that institutional support plays a pivotal role in facilitating nurses’ participation in research activities. Access to resources, such as mentorship programs and research funding, emerged as essential supports that can empower nursing experts and enhance their contribution to research initiatives. With the right backing, nurses can leverage their clinical insights to inform research questions, design patient-centered studies, and ultimately improve healthcare outcomes.

The implications of this study extend beyond the nursing profession. As healthcare continues to evolve, the integration of research into clinical practice remains paramount. By exploring the experiences of nursing experts, the research offers a blueprint for enhancing collaboration between academia and clinical settings. This alignment has the potential to enrich both nursing practice and healthcare delivery, leading to improved patient outcomes and more effective healthcare systems.

The future of nursing research participation hinges on acknowledgment and adaptation to the findings presented in this study. In order to attract and retain skilled nursing professionals within research outpatient clinics, healthcare organizations must prioritize creating supportive environments that reduce barriers and enhance the overall experience of nurses. By fostering a culture of research engagement, institutions can transform nursing practice and encourage innovative solutions to the complex challenges faced by healthcare today.

Furthermore, the study underscores the value of recognizing and celebrating the contributions of nursing professionals within research contexts. As frontline workers with firsthand experience in patient care, nurses possess unique insights that can inform research directions and approaches. Elevating the voices of nursing experts within the research dialogue is critical for shaping a more inclusive and holistic understanding of patient needs and preferences, which is essential for driving meaningful healthcare advancements.

In conclusion, the findings of this qualitative study illuminate the multifaceted experiences of nursing experts participating in research outpatient clinics. By understanding their motivations, challenges, and the overall impact of their contributions, the research paves the way for a more integrated approach to healthcare, where nursing professionals are recognized as vital players in the evolving landscape of research and evidence-based practice. As the field continues to grow, it is crucial to invest in initiatives that support nursing research participation, ultimately enhancing both the profession and the care delivered to patients.

The journey towards better integration of nursing expertise in research is multifaceted and requires ongoing commitment from both nursing professionals and healthcare institutions alike. Ultimately, the study serves as an important reminder of the critical role nurses play in advancing healthcare through research, making it essential for future efforts to prioritize and support their involvement in meaningful ways.

Subject of Research: Experiences of nursing experts participating in research outpatient clinics

Article Title: Exploring nursing experts’ experiences of participating in research outpatient clinics: a qualitative study

Article References:

Qin, Y., Liu, S., Luo, Y. et al. Exploring nursing experts’ experiences of participating in research outpatient clinics: a qualitative study.
BMC Nurs 24, 1404 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-04020-w

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-04020-w

Keywords: Nursing experts, research participation, outpatient clinics, qualitative study, healthcare advancements, evidence-based practice.

In the context of healthcare, nursing remains a pivotal discipline that requires a blend of empathy, skill, and timely intervention. However, as patient numbers increase and healthcare demands rise, the need for innovative solutions has never been greater. The study by Nematollahi Maleki et al. highlights how AI can assist nursing professionals by providing streamlined communication, enhanced data analytics, and predictive analytics. This technological advancement can empower nurses to make informed decisions promptly and effectively, ultimately leading to better patient outcomes.

One of the most critical aspects of integrating AI into nursing care is understanding the concept of AI assists. This entails recognizing that AI systems are not intended to replace human staff but to augment their capabilities. The authors posit that AI can efficiently handle redundant tasks—such as data entry and patient monitoring—thereby freeing nursing professionals to focus more on direct patient interaction and complex clinical problem-solving. Employing the Walker and Avant concept analysis framework, the study clarifies the different components defining AI-assisted nursing care, allowing for a deeper understanding of its significance in modern healthcare environments.

As the research underscores, the application of AI in nursing care is multifaceted. One critical element that the authors explore is the ethical implications of AI-assisted systems. As with any emerging technology, questions arise about data privacy, informed consent, and the potential biases embedded within AI algorithms. The study emphasizes the importance of establishing transparent guidelines and ethical standards to ensure that nursing professionals can leverage AI while upholding their ethical obligations to patients. The potential for data-driven improvements hinges on building trust in AI systems, which necessitates ongoing dialogue among stakeholders.

AI’s role in predictive analytics is another area that the study emphasizes. By utilizing vast datasets from electronic health records, AI algorithms can anticipate patient needs and even identify potential health crises before they escalate. This capability presents an unprecedented opportunity for nursing professionals to proactively address issues, enhancing patient safety and care quality. The authors highlight various case studies where implementation of AI-driven solutions has successfully reduced hospital readmissions and improved patient engagement.

Moreover, the research delves into the diverse applications of AI in nursing practice. From virtual health assistants that monitor patients post-discharge to AI-driven decision-support systems that aid in diagnosing and formulating treatment plans, the potential appears limitless. Nursing professionals equipped with AI tools can offer personalized care that is not just reactive but rather anticipatory of patients’ unique needs. This paradigm shift necessitates training and education for nurses, enabling them to harness technology effectively in everyday practice.

However, the transition to AI-enriched nursing practices is not without challenges. Resistance to change, technological illiteracy among nursing staff, and concerns surrounding job security are among the barriers to adopting AI in nursing care. The study offers insights into overcoming these obstacles, suggesting robust professional development programs and collaborative environments that encourage the integration of AI while providing ongoing support to nursing staff in their adjustment period.

The concept of interdisciplinary collaboration is paramount in the successful implementation of AI in nursing. The research emphasizes that the intersection of nursing, technology, and healthcare requires a concerted effort from multiple stakeholders—including policymakers, healthcare organizations, and educational institutions. A synchronized approach can foster a culture of innovation where AI can flourish alongside traditional nursing practices, ensuring that patients receive the best possible care.

As we anticipate the future of AI in nursing, it is crucial to consider the role of ongoing research in evaluating the impact of these technologies on patient outcomes and nursing practices. The investigation led by Nematollahi Maleki et al. sets the stage for further explorations into the effectiveness of AI-assisted interventions. It challenges the nursing community to remain receptive, proactive, and engaged in discussions about the potential benefits and challenges that AI presents.

Furthermore, the growing implementation of AI technologies raises the stakes in terms of workforce training, necessitating updated curricula in nursing education programs. By equipping future nursing professionals with knowledge of AI systems and their applications, educational institutions can lay the groundwork for a more technologically adept workforce, ensuring that nurses are prepared to navigate the complex landscape of modern healthcare.

The authors close the study with a call to action for further research in this domain. They stress the need for comprehensive studies that investigate the long-term effects of AI-assisted care on patient outcomes, workforce dynamics, and operational efficiency within healthcare settings. Results from such research could catalyze widespread adoption of AI in nursing, with the ultimate goal of enriching patient care and optimizing the healthcare delivery system.

In conclusion, the integration of AI into nursing care represents a transformative opportunity that could redefine how care is administered. The thoughtful examination provided by Nematollahi Maleki et al. through the Walker and Avant approach sheds light on the intricacies of this concept, offering valuable insights into the implications, potential, and challenges posed by AI technologies. As we move forward in a world increasingly shaped by digital innovation, embracing AI in nursing will be crucial for improving patient outcomes, alleviating workforce burdens, and setting a new standard for the future of healthcare.

Subject of Research: Integration of artificial intelligence in nursing care and its implications.

Article Title: Artificial intelligence-assisted nursing care: a concept analysis using Walker and Avant approach.

Article References:

Nematollahi Maleki, R., Shahbazi, S., Hoseinzadeh, M. et al. Artificial intelligence-assisted nursing care: a concept analysis using Walker and Avant approach. BMC Nurs 24, 1175 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-03818-y

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12912-025-03818-y

Keywords: Nursing care, Artificial intelligence, Predictive analytics, Concept analysis, Walker and Avant approach, Healthcare innovation.