ArticleBritish medical bulletin2025
Are hiking recommendations one-size-fits-all? Insights into cardiovascular safety and trail demands.
Article in British medical bulletin, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Personalized cardiovascular risk management for outdoor activities: a digital health application.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Article
- Editorial: Advancing sports cardiology: new frontiers in athlete screening and recovery.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHiking is an outdoor activity with not only significant health benefits but also associated risks, especially for individuals with cardiovascular conditions. Current trail recommendations lack personalization, potentially increasing the risk of adverse events during hiking. SOURCES OF DATA: Prospective, cross-sectional study combining outpatient cardiopulmonary exercise testing with monitored outdoor hiking. Data were collected via portable gas analysis, heart rate monitors, and an official meteorological station. AREAS OF AGREEMENT: Hiking intensity and cardiorespiratory responses vary widely. Cardiovascular risk and trail slope were found to influence the exertion required to complete the hike. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY: There is no consensus on how to standardize trail recommendations to account for individual variability. GROWING POINTS: Personalized hiking advice integrating individual fitness, cardiovascular risk, and trail features may enhance safety. Wearable technologies enable real-time adjustment of exertion levels. AREAS FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: New tools combining personal health data and environmental features to optimize hiking safety and accessibility should be implemented.
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.