SynthesisBMJ open2020
Load progression criteria in exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathy: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of telerehabilitation versus home exercise and in-person therapy for nonoperatively managed tendinopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Pooled it
- Effect of home exercise programs in patients with non-tears rotator cuff-related shoulder pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2025Pooled it
- A functional exercise program improves pain and health related quality of life in patients with fibromyalgia: a randomized controlled trial.Advances in rheumatology (London, England) · 2024Trial
- Effects of Adding Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Neuromodulation to a Percutaneous Needle Electrolysis and Eccentric Exercise Intervention in Patellar Tendinopathy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Achilles tendinopathy.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025Review
- Criteria and Guidelines for Returning to Running Following a Tibial Bone Stress Injury: A Scoping Review.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Foundational Principles and Adaptation of the Healthy and Pathological Achilles Tendon in Response to Resistance Exercise: A Narrative Review and Clinical Implications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study is to summarise and analyse the current literature about what progression criteria are applied in loading exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathies and their evidence and effectiveness.
designSystematic review.
methodsPubMed, Embase, Scopus and PED
resultsThirty studies that described progression criteria were included. Six types of criteria grouped in two categories were identified and included in a new classification proposal: pain as a primary criterion (evoking and avoid-pain based), and pain and symptom control as a secondary criterion (conditioning stages, fatigue-based, subjective perception and temporary linear increase). Most of the studies applied a pain-based criterion. Criteria based on conditioning stages were also commonly applied. Other criteria such as fatigue, a temporary linear increase, or the subjective perception of the patient's abilities were occasionally applied.
conclusionsThere is a predominant use of pain-based criteria, but the utilisation of these criteria is not supported by strong evidence. This review evidences the need for studies that compare the same exercise programme using different progression criteria. A new classification of the existing progression criteria is proposed based on the use of pain as the primary or secondary criterion. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018110997.
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.