ReviewOpen access journal of sports medicine2018
High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training within cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Open access journal of sports medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05790863 (Effects of Low-volume High-intensity Training Versus Moderate-intensity Continuous Training on Physical Performance in Older Adults With Possible Sarcopenia), which is not on this map. Cited by 119 papers, 19 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Effects of Low-volume High-intensity Training Versus Moderate-intensity Continuous Training on Physical Performance in Older Adults With Possible Sarcopenia
Who cites it
119 citing papers in PubMed, 19 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 280 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of Exercise Training with Consideration of Potential Moderating Variables in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Sports medicine - open · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of exercise modalities on physical function and quality of life in patients with heart failure: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.ESC heart failure · 2025Pooled it
- The effectiveness of high-intensity interval training on cardiometabolic outcomes in middle-aged and elderly populations with chronic diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Pooled it
- Exercise and aerobic capacity in individuals with spinal cord injury: A systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression.PLoS medicine · 2023Pooled it
- High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training in patients with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Heart failure reviews · 2023Pooled it
- High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training on patient quality of life in cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- Effect of High-Intensity Interval Training on Functional Movement in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Sports medicine - open · 2023Pooled it
- Effectiveness of HIIT in patients with cancer or cancer survivors: An umbrella and mapping review with meta-meta-analysis.Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports · 2022Pooled it
- Intensity-dependent effects of exercise therapy on walking performance and aerobic fitness in symptomatic patients with lower-extremity peripheral artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Vascular medicine (London, England) · 2022Pooled it
- Effects of High-Intensity Interval vs. Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training on Cardiac Rehabilitation in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Exercise Intensity in Patients with Cardiovascular Diseases: Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- International Exercise Recommendations in Older Adults (ICFSR): Expert Consensus Guidelines.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2021Guideline
- High intensity interval training exercise-induced physiological changes and their potential influence on metabolic syndrome clinical biomarkers: a meta-analysis.BMC endocrine disorders · 2020Pooled it
- Comparative Effectiveness of High-Intensity Interval Training and Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training for Cardiometabolic Risk Factors and Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Childhood Obesity: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Frontiers in physiology · 2020Pooled it
- High-intensity interval training in the therapy and aftercare of cancer patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2019Pooled it
- High-Intensity Interval Training for Patients With Cardiovascular Disease-Is It Safe? A Systematic Review.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training on exercise capacity and health-related quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Brazilian journal of physical therapyPooled it
- Impact of 8 Weeks of Moderate- Versus High-Intensity Interval Training on Sleep Quality.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Trial
59 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAerobic capacity has been shown to be inversely proportionate to cardiovascular mortality and morbidity and there is growing evidence that high-intensity interval training (HIIT) appears to be more effective than moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) in improving cardiorespiratory fitness within the cardiac population. Previously published systematic reviews in cardiovascular disease have neither investigated the effect that the number of weeks of intervention has on cardiorespiratory fitness changes, nor have adverse events been collated.
objectiveWe aimed to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) within the cardiac population that investigated cardiorespiratory fitness changes resulting from HIIT versus MICT and to collate adverse events.
methodsA critical narrative synthesis and meta-analysis was conducted after systematically searching relevant databases up to July 2017. We searched for RCTs that compared cardiorespiratory fitness changes resulting from HIIT versus MICT interventions within the cardiac population.
resultsSeventeen studies, involving 953 participants (465 for HIIT and 488 for MICT) were included in the analysis. HIIT was significantly superior to MICT in improving cardiorespiratory fitness overall (SMD 0.34 mL/kg/min; 95% confidence interval [CI; 0.2-0.48];
conclusionHIIT is superior to MICT in improving cardiorespiratory fitness in participants of cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness are significant for CR programs of >6-week duration. Programs of 7-12 weeks' duration resulted in the largest improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness for patients with coronary artery disease. HIIT appears to be as safe as MICT for CR participants.
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.