Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40341471›Full record

ArticleJournal of cardiovascular translational research2025

Validity and Reproducibility of the Six-Minute Stepper Test in Cardiac Patients.

Michaël Racodon, Claudine Fabre, Pierre Vanhove, Jordan Do Vale, Romain Bolpaire, Elodie Moutailler, Félicité Malanda, Amandine Secq

Registry-linked trialAbstract readValidation StudyComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cardiovascular translational research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04699136 (Use and Validation of the 6-minute Stepper Test in in Patients With Cardiac Pathologies Needing Rehabilitation and Reeducation), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04699136 nacompletednot on this map

Use and Validation of the 6-minute Stepper Test in in Patients With Cardiac Pathologies Needing Rehabilitation and Reeducation (CVRR)

TypeinterventionalSponsorLille Catholic UniversityRan2021 to 2022Enrolled60ConditionsCardiac DiseaseArms6 minutes step test (ST6)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Michaël RacodonClinique La Mitterie, Service de Rééducation Réadaptation Cardiovasculaire, 59160, Lille, France. mracodon@clinique-mitterie.com.ORCID 0000-0003-4539-5686
Claudine FabreUniv. Lille, Univ. Artois, Univ. Littoral Côte d'Opale, ULR 7369 - URePSSS - Unité de Recherche Pluridisciplinaire Sport Santé Société, F-59000, Lille, France.
Pierre VanhoveClinique La Mitterie, Service de Rééducation Réadaptation Cardiovasculaire, 59160, Lille, France.
Jordan Do ValeClinique La Mitterie, Service de Rééducation Réadaptation Cardiovasculaire, 59160, Lille, France.
Romain BolpaireClinique La Mitterie, Service de Rééducation Réadaptation Cardiovasculaire, 59160, Lille, France.
Elodie MoutaillerLille Catholic Hospitals, Biostatistics Department- Delegations for Clinical Research and Innovation, Lille Catholic University, Lille, France.
Félicité MalandaClinique La Mitterie, Service de Rééducation Réadaptation Cardiovasculaire, 59160, Lille, France.
Amandine SecqClinique La Mitterie, Service de Rééducation Réadaptation Cardiovasculaire, 59160, Lille, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) traditionally assesses exercise capacity in cardiac patients but requires a large space. The Six-Minute Stepper Test (6MST) has been validated as an alternative in various populations. This study evaluates the reproducibility, sensitivity, and validity of the 6MST in 60 cardiac patients (15 women, 45 men, 58 ± 11.2 years). Participants underwent cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPET), two 6MSTs, and one 6MWT at the start and end of cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Performance in the 6MST improved significantly after CR (343 ± 89.0 vs. 451 ± 105.6 steps, p < 0.0001). The 6MST showed moderate correlation with the 6MWT and CPET (r = 0.54, p < 0.0001). Dyspnoea and leg fatigue were higher in the 6MST than in the 6MWT (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: The 6MST is a safe, valid, sensitive, and reproducible tool for evaluating exercise capacity in cardiac patients, comparable to the 6MWT.

Indexed as

Exercise TestExercise ToleranceHeart DiseasesWalk TestAdultAgedCardiac RehabilitationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsTime FactorsCardiac diseasesSix-Minute Stepper TestSix-Minute Walk Test

Identifiers

PMID40341471

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.