SynthesisReviews in cardiovascular medicine2022
Application and Measurement Properties of the Talk Test in Cardiopulmonary Patients: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of cardiorespiratory responses between treadmill and bicycle ergometer exercise.Journal of exercise rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Aerobic Exercise Prescription in Cardiac Rehabilitation Based on Heart Rate from Talk Test Stages and 6-Minute Walk Test.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2023Article
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
Background: The talk test (TT) evaluates the exercise intensity by measuring speech comfort level during aerobic exercise. There are several application protocols available to assess individuals with cardiopulmonary diseases. However, the measurement properties of the TT were not systematically reviewed yet. Methods: A systematic review was developed, registered (CRD420181068930), and reported according to PRISMA Statement. Randomized clinical trials, cross-sectional studies, or series cases were identified through multiple databases and were selected if they presented concomitant speech provocation and an exercise test. Included studies were evaluated based on methodological quality (adapted New Castle-Ottawa Scale), descriptive quality (STROBE Statement), and risk of bias (COSMIN bias risk scale). Results: Ten studies were included. Seven studies presented moderate to high quality and the majority presented good scores according to the STROBE statement. Four hundred and fourteen subjects performed the TT, the majority being patients with coronary artery disease. The test validity was supported by the included studies. Talk Test reliability was considered satisfactory, although only one study presented an adequate reliability analysis. The studies found a correlation between the last positive stage of the TT with the first ventilatory threshold. Workload, oxygen uptake, and heart rate in the last positive stage of the TT were not different from the same parameters related to the first ventilatory threshold. Conclusions: The evidence indicates that the TT is suitable as an alternative tool for the assessment and prescription of exercise in individuals with cardiovascular diseases. The stage when the individual is still able to speak comfortably is suggested as the intensity for aerobic exercise prescription. As there is still no well-defined and fully explored TT protocol, caution is required when interpreting the TT results.
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.