ArticleBMJ open2024
Quality of aerobic training description and its relation to intervention efficacy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease trials: study protocol for a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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.
- User personas for exercise rehabilitation behaviors in older patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a qualitative study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major global health concern, characterised by ventilatory constraints, decreased cardiovascular fitness and reduced limb muscle function, profoundly affecting patients' quality of life. Aerobic training plays a crucial role in the treatment of COPD, but the variability in methodologies and incomplete reporting of key components in aerobic training trials limits the assessment of their effectiveness. This systematic review aims to critically evaluate the application of training principles and reporting of key components in aerobic training trials in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the COPD literature. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The protocol adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol guidelines. The review will include RCTs utilising aerobic training in individuals with COPD. A comprehensive search, following a predefined search strategy will identify studies published from 2007 to 2024 in English from MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL and PEDro. Studies including people with COPD and any aerobic training intervention will be included. Two reviewers will independently screen abstracts and titles for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently conduct the screening of full-text documents and data extraction. Study quality will be assessed using the Tool for the assESsment of sTudy quality and bias in Exercise, specifically developed for exercise training studies. The certainty of the evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. A systematic synthesis will be provided, with meta-analyses and meta-regression when appropriate. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As this review will involve the analysis of published data, ethical approval is not required. The findings of this review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021247343.
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.