Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29875683›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in physiology2018

Beneficial Autophagic Activities, Mitochondrial Function, and Metabolic Phenotype Adaptations Promoted by High-Intensity Interval Training in a Rat Model.

Fang-Hui Li, Tao Li, Jing-Yi Ai, Lei Sun, Zhu Min, Rui Duan, Ling Zhu, Yan-Ying Liu, Timon Cheng-Yi Liu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Fang-Hui LiSchool of Sport Sciences, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, China.
Tao LiLaboratory of Laser Sports Medicine, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.
Jing-Yi AiSchool of Sport Sciences, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, China.
Lei SunSchool of Sport Sciences, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, China.
Zhu MinSchool of Sport Sciences, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, China.
Rui DuanLaboratory of Laser Sports Medicine, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.
Ling ZhuLaboratory of Laser Sports Medicine, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.
Yan-Ying LiuSchool of Physical Education and Health, Zhaoqing University, Zhaoqing, China.
Timon Cheng-Yi LiuLaboratory of Laser Sports Medicine, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.
Nanjing Normal University · CNSouth China Normal University · CNZhaoqing University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The effects of high-intensity interval (HIIT) and moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on basal autophagy and mitochondrial function in cardiac and skeletal muscle and plasma metabolic phenotypes have not been clearly characterized. Here, we investigated how 10-weeks HIIT and MICT differentially modify basal autophagy and mitochondrial markers in cardiac and skeletal muscle and conducted an untargeted metabolomics study with proton nuclear magnetic resonance (

Indexed as

continuous trainingexercise tolerancehigh-intensity interval trainingmetabolomicsNMR spectroscopy

Identifiers

PMID29875683
PMCPMC5974531
OpenAlexW2802481827

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.