ArticleWorld journal of hepatology2025
Intra-rater reliability of the 6-min walk test in people with liver cirrhosis.
Article in World journal of hepatology, 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.
- Article
- Should the routine use of the 6-minute walk test be implemented in liver disease assessment: Not so fast.World journal of hepatology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiver cirrhosis often leads to significant impairments in functional capacity, which are associated with disease severity and prognosis. Simple, reliable, and low-cost tests are essential to monitor these patients in clinical practice. The 6-min walk test (6MWT) is widely used in other chronic conditions, but its measurement properties in cirrhosis remain underexplored.
aimTo assess the reliability of the 6MWT in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC).
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted at a teaching hospital in Juiz de Fora-Minas Gerais. Patients diagnosed with LC at any stage of the disease and under clinical follow-up were included. Patients with grade 2 or higher encephalopathy, respiratory, and/or musculoskeletal diseases or who did not understand the test were excluded. Initially, anamnesis and anthropometric evaluation were performed, followed by the 6MWT. After 24 h the test was repeated. Descriptive statistics were used to present the data. Continuous variables were tested for normality using the Shapiro-Wilk test. The reliability of the 6MWT was tested through Bland-Altman analysis, typical error of measurement, and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) as well as a one-sample
resultsThe mean difference between 6MWT-2 and 6MWT-1 was -18.9 m; the lower limit of the Bland-Altman agreement was -83.5 m, and the upper limit was 45.7 m. One participant was excluded from further analyses for being outside these limits. The typical error of measurement was 18.9 m. The ICC showed excellent reliability between the two tests (ICC = 0.97, 95% confidence internal: 0.90-0.99,
conclusionThe 6MWT is a test with excellent reliability. It is safe, easy to administer, inexpensive, and can be introduced into routine practice without loss of diagnostic precision in estimating the functional capacity of patients with LC.
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.