Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37626066›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2023

High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training on patient quality of life in cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Haohan Yu, Xudong Zhao, Xiaoxia Wu, Jing Yang, Jun Wang, Lijuan Hou

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
10.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Haohan YuCollege of P.E and Sports, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Xudong ZhaoCollege of P.E and Sports, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Xiaoxia WuDepartment of respiratory and critical care medicine, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Jing YangFaculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Jun WangFaculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China. jun_wang@bnu.edu.cn.
Lijuan HouCollege of P.E and Sports, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China. houlj@bnu.edu.cn.
Beijing Normal University · CNFujian Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on the quality of life (QOL) and mental health (MH) of patients with cardiovascular disease (CVDs). Web of Science, Medline, Embase, Cochrane (CENTRAL), CINAHL, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and China Science and Technology Journal databases were searched from their date of establishment to July, 2023. A total of 5798 articles were screened, of which 25 were included according to the eligibility criteria. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used to analyze data from the same and different indicator categories, respectively. The fixed-effects model (FE) or random-effects model (RE) combined data based on the between-study heterogeneity. There were no statistically significant differences regarding QOL, physical component summary (PCS), mental component summary (MCS), and MH, including depression and anxiety levels, between the HIIT and MICT groups [SMD = 0.21, 95% confidence interval (CI)  - 0.18-0.61, Z = 1.06, P = 0.290; SMD = 0.10, 95% CI  - 0.03-0.23, Z = 1.52, P = 0.128; SMD = 0.07, 95% CI  - 0.05-0.20, Z = 1.13, P = 0.25; SMD = - 0.08, 95% CI  - 0.40-0.25, Z = - 0.46, P = 0.646; WMD = 0.14. 95% CI  - 0.56-0.84, Z = 0.39, P = 0.694, respectively]. HIIT significantly improved PCS in the coronary artery disease (CAD) population subgroup relative to MICT. HIIT was also significantly superior to MICT for physical role, vitality, and social function. We conclude that HIIT and MICT have similar effects on QOL and MH in patients with CVD, while HIIT is favorable for improving patients' self-perceived physiological functioning based on their status and social adjustment, and this effect is more significant in patients with CAD.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesCoronary Artery DiseaseHigh-Intensity Interval TrainingChinaHumansQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID37626066
PMCPMC10457360
OpenAlexW4386167565

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.