ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Physical Training and Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Patients with Cystic Fibrosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
BACKGROUND/
objectivesPhysical training and Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Patients with Cystic Fibrosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials. Pulmonary rehabilitation and physical training are essential components of the comprehensive management of patients with cystic fibrosis. Despite documented benefits for some clinical outcomes, uncertainty exists regarding their overall effects. Therefore, the objective of the present meta-analysis is to determine the effectiveness of physical training and pulmonary rehabilitation in patients with CF.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials published between 1990 and 2025 was conducted using the PubMed, Cochrane Clinical Trial, SCOPUS, Science Direct, Web of Science, Scielo, and LILAC databases. The risk of bias was evaluated using the RoB 2 tool, the quality of the evidence with the Jadad scale, and the certainty of the evidence for each outcome was assessed according to GRADE guidelines. This meta-analysis was developed using the statistical packages RevMan 5.4
resultsTwenty-three studies with a total of 800 patients with CF were included. This meta-analysis showed that pulmonary rehabilitation and physical training did not affect pulmonary function, as observed in FEV1 (SMD: 0.05; 95% CI: -0.09 to 0.20;
conclusionsThe intervention evaluated in this meta-analysis does not have effects on pulmonary function but may influence exercise capacity, particularly VO
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.