ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2022
Mechanistic evidence and exercise interventions: Causal claims, extrapolation, and implementation.
Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beneficial Outcome Pathways: A New Mechanistic Framework to Map the Health Effects of Fasting in Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease.Journal of nutrition and metabolism · 2026Review
- Harnessing Nonlinear Mechanics to Transform Medical Diagnostics.Applied mechanics reviews · 2025Article
- Mechanistic evidence and exercise interventions: Causal claims, extrapolation, and implementation.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2022Article
- Philosophy and the clinic: Stigma, respect and shame.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleExercise interventions and policies are widely prescribed in both sport and healthcare. Research investigating exercise interventions and policies is generally conducted using an Evidence-Based framework, placing an emphasis on evidence gathered from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). AIMS AND
objectivesTo explore the idea that, in addition to the assessment of evidence from RCTs when investigating exercise interventions, mechanistic studies ought to also be assessed and considered.
methodsThis article assesses the rationale supporting the use of RCTs as evidence for exercise interventions, and the use of evidence of mechanisms in establishing efficacy, determining external validity, and tailoring interventions. RESULTS AND
conclusionsThe article argues that evidence from mechanistic studies ought to be considered alongside evidence from RCTs because: as RCTs investigating exercise interventions tend to be of low quality, mechanistic studies ought to be used to reinforce the evidence base; further, evidence from mechanistic studies is highly useful for both questions of extrapolation and implementation. This article argues for this on theoretical grounds, and also draws on a number of case studies.
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.