ReviewThe International journal of angiology : official publication of the International College of Angiology, Inc2013
Optimizing cardiovascular benefits of exercise: a review of rodent models.
Review in The International journal of angiology : official publication of the International College of Angiology, Inc, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Athletes with higher VOBMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Although research unanimously maintains that exercise can ward off cardiovascular disease (CVD), the optimal type, duration, intensity, and combination of forms are yet not clear. In our review of existing rodent-based studies on exercise and cardiovascular health, we attempt to find the optimal forms, intensities, and durations of exercise. Using Scopus and Medline, a literature review of English language comparative journal studies of cardiovascular benefits and exercise was performed. This review examines the existing literature on rodent models of aerobic, anaerobic, and power exercise and compares the benefits of various training forms, intensities, and durations. The rodent studies reviewed in this article correlate with reports on human subjects that suggest regular aerobic exercise can improve cardiac and vascular structure and function, as well as lipid profiles, and reduce the risk of CVD. Findings demonstrate an abundance of rodent-based aerobic studies, but a lack of anaerobic and power forms of exercise, as well as comparisons of these three components of exercise. Thus, further studies must be conducted to determine a truly optimal regimen for cardiovascular health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.