Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40861009›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2025

Knee extensor training in patients with patellofemoral pain: a systematic review and synthesis.

Ted Gunhamn, Haris Pojskic, Sofia Ryman Augustsson

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.

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

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

3 authors.

Ted GunhamnDepartment of Sport Science, Faculty of Social Sciences, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden.
Haris PojskicDepartment of Sport Science, Faculty of Social Sciences, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden.
Sofia Ryman AugustssonDepartment of Sport Science, Faculty of Social Sciences, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This systematic review and synthesis aimed to describe the frequency and characteristics of knee extensor exercise prescriptions within patellofemoral pain (PFP) interventions and to assess the extent to which key training variables are reported. By doing so, it sought to inform and support more transparent and standardized reporting practices in exercise-based rehabilitation for individuals with PFP. Method: This systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. A literature search was performed in January 2024 across Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and SportDiscus. Studies were included if they investigated interventions incorporating knee extensor exercises for PFP. Results: Seventy-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. The most commonly prescribed exercises were the straight leg raise, squat, and open-chain knee extension, typically performed as three sets of ten repetitions with bodyweight resistance. However, key training variables such as range of motion and intensity were often inadequately reported, limiting reproducibility and clinical applicability. Conclusion: Knee extensor training for PFP predominantly consists of low-load, moderate-volume exercises, differing from conventional strength training recommendations. The lack of detailed reporting on critical variables, such as intensity and range of motion, reduces the clarity and applicability of rehabilitation protocols. Standardized reporting and further research are needed to optimize exercise prescription for PFP management.

Indexed as

physical therapyquadricepsrange of motionrehabilitationresistance training

Identifiers

PMID40861009
PMCPMC12377044

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.