SynthesisPloS one2017
Aquatic cycling-What do we know? A scoping review on head-out aquatic cycling.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Land vs. water HIIE effects on muscle oxygenation and physiological parameter responses in postmenopausal women.Scientific reports · 2020Trial
- Aqua cycling for immunological recovery after intensive, eccentric exercise.European journal of applied physiology · 2019Trial
- Energy Intake and Appetite Sensations Responses to Aquatic Cycling in Healthy Women: The WatHealth Study.Nutrients · 2021Article
- Concurrent and Construct Validation of a Scale for Rating Perceived Exertion in Aquatic Cycling for Young Men.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the past few years, aquatic cycling has become a trending fitness activity. However, the literature has not been reviewed exhaustively. Therefore, using scoping review methodology, the aim of this review was to explore the current state of the literature concerning aquatic cycling. This study specifically focused on study designs, populations and outcomes. A comprehensive search of seven databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Cinahl, Embase, PEDro,Web of Science, WorldCat) was conducted up to 30th September 2016. GoogleScholar, World Cat, ResearchGate, specific aquatic therapy websites and aquatic therapy journals were searched to identify additional literature. Full-text publications in English, German or Dutch were included. Studies were included when the intervention involved head-out cycling carried out in 10° to 35° Celsius water. Exclusion criteria were the use of wet suits or confounding interventions that would affect participants' homeostasis. 63 articles were included and the study parameters of these studies were summarized. Using three grouping themes, included studies were categorised as 1) single session tests comparing aquatic versus land cycling, or 2) aquatic cycling only sessions investigating different exercise conditions and 3) aquatic cycling intervention programmes. Although the experimental conditions differed noticeably across the studies, shared characteristics were identified. Cardiovascular parameters were investigated by many of the studies with the results suggesting that the cardiac demand of aquatic cycling seems similar to land-based cycling. Only six studies evaluated the effect of aquatic cycling interventions. Therefore, future research should investigate the effects of aquatic cycling interventions, preferably in individuals that are expected to gain health benefits from aquatic cycling. Moreover, this comprehensive outline of available literature could serve as a starting point for systematic reviews or clinical studies on the effects of aquatic cycling on the cardiovascular responses.
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.