SynthesisClinical rehabilitation2026
High-intensity interval training after stroke: A mixed-methods systematic review and meta-analysis of safety, feasibility and acceptability.
Synthesis in Clinical rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Study-level age patterns in cardiometabolic response to high-intensity interval training among adults with overweight or obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Pooled it
- High-intensity interval training after stroke: a three-level random-effects meta-analysis with cluster-robust inference and exploratory dose-parameter signals.Frontiers in neurologyPooled it
- High-Intensity Interval Training on Cardiorespiratory Fitness, Cognitive Function, and Functional Capacity in Adults with Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectiveTo synthesise evidence regarding the safety, feasibility and acceptability of high-intensity interval training in adults post-stroke.Data sourcesA systematic literature search using eight major databases from inception to January 2025.Review methodsStudies of any design, involving adults post-stroke, reporting on safety, feasibility and/or acceptability of any type of high-intensity interval training, were eligible. Methodological quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project or the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, as appropriate. Meta-analyses of adverse events and dropouts were undertaken on data from randomised controlled trials. GRADE methodology was used to categorise the level of certainty of the evidence from each meta-analysis.ResultsTwenty studies plus one follow-up and a cost analysis, involving 658 participants, were included. Methodological quality varied. High-intensity interval training was mainly conducted individually and in supervised settings. There were no fatalities related to high-intensity interval training. There was low-moderate certainty of no difference in the risk of adverse events, whether these were intervention-related, non-intervention related or unclear. Average attendance at high-intensity interval training sessions was 94.4%. Reporting on acceptability of high-intensity interval training was scarce, but where reported participants' experiences were generally favourable.ConclusionThis systematic review found low-moderate certainty evidence that high-intensity interval training can be safe and feasible for carefully selected, generally younger, mildly affected, male stroke survivors in the chronic stage, supervised by trained professionals in controlled settings. Future studies should investigate experiences of high-intensity interval training and explore its use in a wider stroke population and range of settings.
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.