ArticleTanaffos2021
Comparison of Effect of High-Intensity Interval Training and Aerobic Training on Respiratory Volumes in Female Students.
Article in Tanaffos, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of inspiratory muscle training on lung function parameter in swimmers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024Pooled it
- Exercise Training Modalities in Young and Middle-Aged Adults With Prehypertension or Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Health science reports · 2025Review
- Pulmonary responses following cardiac rehabilitation and the relationship with functional outcomes in children and young adults with heart disease.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sedentary lifestyle can cause the deterioration of respiratory indices. The interventions, such as physical activity programs, might prevent such deterioration. This study aimed to compare the effect of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and aerobic training on the respiratory volumes in female students. Materials and Methods: In this semi-experimental study, 30 healthy inactive volunteer female students (age: 26.3±4.30 years; height: 1.63±8.36 m; body mass index: 20-28 kg/m Results: The results showed that aerobic training significantly improved the forced expiratory volume in one second (P=0.045), forced expiratory flow (FEF) within 25-75% (P=0.002), and peak expiratory flow (P=0.003); however, HIIT did not have a significant effect on these indicators. There was no significant difference between the two types of training in any of the indicators except for FEF within 25-75%. Conclusion: According to the study results, aerobic training might be more effective in the improvement of pulmonary parameters than intense training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36267926PMC9577212W4307031725What 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.