Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24549476›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2014

Aerobic interval training vs. moderate continuous training in coronary artery disease patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Nele Pattyn, Ellen Coeckelberghs, Roselien Buys, Véronique A Cornelissen, Luc Vanhees

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

45 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Response of VOPhysiological reports · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Apolipoprotein B and angiotensin-converting enzyme polymorphisms and aerobic interval training: randomized controlled trial in coronary artery disease patients.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2018
    Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Effects of continuous vs interval exercise training on oxygen uptake efficiency slope in patients with coronary artery disease.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2016
    Trial
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Nele PattynDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Tervuursevest 101, B 1501, 3001, Heverlee, Belgium, nele.pattyn@faber.kuleuven.be.
Ellen Coeckelberghs
Roselien Buys
Véronique A Cornelissen
Luc Vanhees

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExercise training improves exercise capacity (peakVO2), which is closely related to long-term survival in cardiac patients. However, it remains unclear which type and intensity of exercise is most effective for improving exercise tolerance and body weight. Individual studies suggest that aerobic interval training (AIT) might increase peakVO2 more in this population.

objectiveWe conducted a meta-analysis to summarize the effects of AIT compared with moderate continuous training (MCT) on peakVO2, submaximal exercise capacity, and body weight in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) with preserved and/or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: A systematic search was conducted and we included randomized trials comparing AIT and MCT in CAD patients lasting at least 4 weeks, reporting peakVO2 results, and published in a peer-reviewed journal up to May 2013. The primary outcome measure was peakVO2. Secondary outcomes were submaximal exercise capacity parameters and body weight. SYNTHESIS

methodsRandom- and fixed-effects models were used and data were reported as weighted means and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

resultsNine study groups were included, involving 206 patients (100 AIT, 106 MCT). Overall, AIT resulted in a significantly larger increase in peakVO2 [+1.60 mL/kg/min (95% CI 0.18-3.02; p = 0.03)] compared with MCT. MCT seemed to be more effective in reducing body weight (-0.78 kg; 95% CI -0.01 to 1.58; p = 0.05). LIMITATIONS: The small number of studies might have affected the power to reach significance for the secondary outcomes.

conclusionIn CAD patients with preserved and/or reduced LVEF, AIT is superior to MCT for improving peakVO2, while MCT seems to be more effective in reducing body weight. However, large, well-designed, randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm these findings.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseaseExercise TherapyExercise ToleranceHumansOxygen ConsumptionRisk FactorsStroke VolumeWeight Loss

Identifiers

PMID24549476

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.