ArticleVeterinary record open2021
Efficacy of high-intensity interval training compared with moderate-intensity continuous training on maximal aerobic potency in dogs: Trial protocol for a randomised controlled clinical study.
Article in Veterinary record open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of high-intensity interval training compared with moderate-intensity continuous training on maximal aerobic potency in dogs: Trial protocol for a randomised controlled clinical study.Veterinary record open · 2021Article
- The Immediate Effect of Parachute-Resisted Gallop on Heart Rate, Running Speed and Stride Frequency in Dogs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh-intensity interval training (HIIT) is a more efficient method to improve exercise capacity than moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) because of its greater physiological stimulus.
objectiveThe aim of this protocol is to evaluate the efficacy of HIIT on maximal aerobic potency in dogs as compared to MICT.
methodsThis protocol is for a randomised, blinded controlled clinical trial, with three parallel groups for the purpose of demonstrating superiority. Thirty dogs aged between 12 and 84 months of both sexes and different breeds will be included. Dogs, before initiating and after finalising the training will perform an incremental exercise test on a treadmill to obtain maximal speed and lactate threshold; resting parameters of heart and respiratory rate, left ventricle chamber and systolic function will be measured. Dogs assigned to each intervention will endure a 42-min session of HIIT or MICT during 12 weeks. HIIT comprises four intervals of 4 min each at a load of 85%, alternating with a 4-min resting period. MICT group will have a continuous load of 60%. The control group will remain in a cage. An intention-to-treat statistical analysis will be implemented. Analysis of covariance will be used to estimate the effect of HIIT compared with MICT training on maximal aerobic potency, aerobic resistance, systolic function at rest, left ventricle chamber measurements and indexes, respiratory rate and HR at rest.
conclusionSignificant time and effort are invested into training sports/working dogs, which could benefit from improving physical capacity by means of the HIIT methodology.
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.