ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2026
The dose-effect relationship of aquatic exercise in improving physical function in older adults.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveGlobal aging has increased the risk of falls and functional dependence among elderly people. Aquatic exercise, with its low-impact and multimuscle group activation characteristics, provides a unique physiological stimulation environment for improving the physical functions of the elderly population. However, previous studies have insufficiently integrated multidimensional functional indicators and dose-effect relationships. In this study, a meta-analysis was conducted to systematically evaluate the effects of aquatic exercise on the multidimensional physical functions of elderly people and to determine the differential effects of different intervention programs.
methodsDatabases in both Chinese and English were searched up to April 2025, and 23 RCTs (1179 healthy elderly individuals aged ≥ 60 years) were included. The Cochrane tool was used to assess the risk of bias, and data on intervention programs (type, duration, frequency) and functional indicators were extracted. RevMan 5.4 was used to combine effect sizes (MD and 95% CI), and subgroup analysis was conducted to explore the sources of heterogeneity (I
results(1) Balance ability: Static balance improved (single-leg standing time: MD = 3.05 s, P = 0.007); dynamic balance improved (TUG time reduced by 0.59 s, P = 0.028), with resistance training having the greatest effect (MD = -1.80 s, P = 0.006); and a higher frequency intervention (> 2 times/week) was more effective. (2) Muscle strength: Lower limb strength increased (30-s chair stand test increased by 2.77 times, P < 0.001), with combined resistance and aerobic training having the greatest effect (MD = 3.98 times, P < 0.001); upper limb strength increased (arm curl test increased by 3.17 times, P < 0.001). (3) Cardiopulmonary function: The 2MST increased 7.56 times (P < 0.001). (4) Flexibility: Lower limb flexibility improved by 3.21 cm (P = 0.024), whereas upper limb flexibility did not significantly improve. (5) Subgroup analysis revealed that long-term (> 12 weeks) and high-frequency (> 2 times/week) interventions were more effective for improving dynamic balance (MD = -0.87 vs. -0.34 s) and increasing lower limb strength (MD = 5.65 vs. 1.45 times); combined resistance and aerobic training had significant overall benefits.
conclusionAquatic exercise can comprehensively improve the physical function of elderly people. High-frequency (> 2 times/week) and long-term (> 12 weeks) combined resistance and aerobic training programs are recommended. Clinically, task-oriented interventions should be designed on the basis of individual deficits, and future research should standardize exercise parameters and explore its psychological and social benefits.
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.