ReviewJournal of pain research2025
Effect of Exercise Interventions for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.
Review in Journal of pain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Reflections on 20 Years of Research on Tai Chi for Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: An Updated Review.Current rheumatology reports · 2026Review
- Prospects for Physical Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Literature Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Transcending aging: disease specificity, assessment challenges, and management strategies for rheumatoid arthritis-related sarcopenia.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Cardiovascular rehabilitation in rheumatoid arthritis: evidence and future directions.Rheumatology international · 2025Review
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
Objective: To compare the efficacy of various exercise modalities for Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) employing a network meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic search was conducted across eight databases-PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and SinoMed-up to December 4, 2024, for randomized controlled trials on exercise for RA. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (RoB 2) assessed study quality. A network meta-analysis was performed utilizing Stata 17.0. Our study measured outcomes through mean differences (MD) accompanied by 95% credible intervals (CIs) to quantify effect sizes, while interventions were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probability scores, and the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) software to evaluate evidence certainty. Results: A total of 34 trials included 2,435 RA patients and 10 exercise interventions: walking or jogging, relaxation training, resistance exercise, Pilates, aerobic exercise, aerobic exercise + resistance exercise, yoga, traditional Chinese exercise, cycling, and Pilates + walking or jogging. The NMA results indicated that Pilates was the most effective for pain relief (VAS: MD = -2.17 cm, 95% CI: -3.77 to -2.57, SUCRA = 91.8%); aerobic exercise + resistance exercise was most effective for reducing morning stiffness duration (MD = -8.23 min, 95% CI: -9.06 to -7.39, SUCRA = 100.0%); and traditional Chinese exercise was most effective for improving disease activity (DAS28-ESR: MD = -0.68 scores, 95% CI: -1.04 to -0.32, SUCRA = 95.5%). Risk assessment showed 4 studies "low", 4 "high", and 26 "some concern" regarding bias. The CINeMA assessment indicated that most comparisons provided low or very low-quality evidence. Conclusion: Exercise interventions are effective supplements for RA treatment, with specific exercises offering distinct benefits: Pilates for pain, aerobic exercise + resistance exercise for morning stiffness, traditional Chinese exercise for disease activity. Further high-quality studies are needed for validation.
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.