SynthesisEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2022
Post-exercise energy intake: do the intensity and mode of exercise matter? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing high-intensity interval with moderate-intensity continuous protocols.
Synthesis in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effects of Exercise Intervention in Subjects with Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease.Journal of obesity & metabolic syndrome · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the impact of exercise intensity and mode (high-intensity interval exercise-HIIE or sprint interval exercise-SIE versus moderate-intensity continuous exercise-MICE) on post-exercise ad libitum energy intake. The studies were required to have at least two exercise conditions (HIIE or SIE vs MICE). Overall, 642 manuscripts were initially identified and 17 met the eligibility criteria. The random effect meta-analysis did not reveal differences for absolute energy intake (28 pairwise comparisons) between HIIE (p = 0.54; 95% Confidence Interval - CI: -0.14 to 0.26; 22 pairwise comparisons) or SIE (p = 0.08; 95% CI -0.65 to 0.03; 6 pairwise comparisons) versus MICE, neither for relative energy intake (p = 0.97; 95% CI: -0.35 to 0.10 for HIIE; p = 0.28; 95% CI: -1.03 to 0.06 for SIE) with five and one pairwise comparisons, respectively. Subgroup analyses for methods to evaluate ad libitum energy intake, body mass, sex, volume, and timing of exercise were non-significant. Inspecting each study, two pairwise comparisons reported lower post-exercise absolute energy intake in HIIE compared to control (CRTL), and three pairwise comparisons reported lower absolute energy intake after SIE compared to MICE. None pairwise comparison reported differences between protocols (HIIE or SIE versus MICE) for relative energy intake. In conclusion, the meta-analysis did not show differences between protocols for absolute and relative energy intake; five pairwise comparisons from 28 demonstrated lower absolute energy intake in HIIE or SIE compared to CRTL or MICE. Further studies are needed to address the key relevant variables in which exercise intensity and mode may impact energy intake.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34675403What 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.