Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32483336›Full record

ReviewSpinal cord2021

Viability of high intensity interval training in persons with spinal cord injury-a perspective review.

Todd A Astorino, Audrey L Hicks, James L J Bilzon

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Spinal cord, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Todd A AstorinoDepartment of Kinesiology, CSU-San Marcos, San Marcos, CA, USA. astorino@csusm.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0492-0173
Audrey L HicksDepartment of Kinesiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
James L J BilzonDepartment for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6701-7603
California State University, San Marcos · USMcMaster University · CAUniversity of Bath · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spinal cord injury (SCI) leads to loss of sensory and motor function below the level of injury leading to paralysis and limitations to locomotion. Therefore, persons with SCI face various challenges in engaging in regular physical activity, which leads to a reduction in physical fitness, increases in body fat mass, and reduced physical and mental health status. Moderate intensity continuous training (MICT) is recommended to enhance physical fitness and overall health status in this population, but it is not always effective in promoting these benefits. High intensity interval training (HIIT) has been promoted as an alternative to MICT in individuals with SCI due to its documented efficacy in healthy able-bodied individuals as well as those with chronic disease. However, the body of knowledge concerning its application in this population is limited and mostly composed of studies with small and homogeneous samples. The aim of this review was to summarize the existing literature regarding the efficacy of HIIT on changes in health- and fitness-related outcomes in this population, denote potential adverse responses to HIIT, describe how participants perceive this modality of exercise training, and identify the overall feasibility of interval training in persons with SCI.

Indexed as

High-Intensity Interval TrainingSpinal Cord InjuriesExerciseHumansPhysical Fitness

Identifiers

PMID32483336
OpenAlexW3029633207

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.