SynthesisEuropean respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society2024
Clinimetric properties of field exercise tests in cystic fibrosis: a systematic review.
Synthesis in European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society, 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.
- Validity of Alfred Step Test Exercise Protocol (A-STEP) as a Surrogate VOCanadian respiratory journal · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAccurate measurement of exercise capacity is an important prognostic indicator for people with cystic fibrosis (pwCF); however, gold-standard, cardiopulmonary exercise tests are commonly unavailable. This review systematically describes the clinimetric properties of field exercise tests for pwCF.
methodsA systematic review was undertaken for studies reporting field exercise tests in pwCF. Four electronic databases were searched for studies published from 1990 to January 2024. Where available, clinimetric properties reported included reliability, validity, responsiveness and interpretability.
results4041 studies were identified with 153 eligible for inclusion. 10 different field exercise tests were described, including six walk/run tests (incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT), modified shuttle test-15 levels (MST-15), MST-25 levels (MST-25), 20-m shuttle test, 6-min walk test (6MWT) and 12-min walk test (12MWT)), three step tests (3-min step test (3MST), incremental step test and Alfred step test (A-STEP)) and the 1-min sit-to-stand test (1STS). Reliability was found for the ISWT, MST-15, 6MWT, 1STS and 3MST (intraclass correlation coefficients >0.80). The ISWT, MST-15 and 6MWT were found to be valid (concurrent and discriminate). Responsiveness was supported for the 6MWT only. Four tests (MST-15, 6MWT, 3MST and 1STS) demonstrated ceiling effects.
conclusionThis review supports the reliability, validity and responsiveness of the 6MWT in pwCF. The ISWT and MST-15 were found to be valid. The 1STS is reliable and feasible, but its utility is limited by ceiling effects. The 3MST, MST-25, 20-m shuttle test, incremental step test, A-STEP and 12MWT require further investigations of their clinimetric properties.
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.