ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2026
How Intense Is Effective? Exploring Aerobic Exercise Intensity for Knee Osteoarthritis Through a Bayesian NetworkMeta-Analysis.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionKnee osteoarthritis (KOA) is characterized by pain, stiffness, and functional limitation. Aerobic exercise (AE) is a key treatment with proven benefits.
aimsTo determine the most effective AE intensity for KOA.
methodsSearches were performed in seven databases, including randomized controlled trials with AE-only groups. Outcomes assessed were pain, walking and sit-to-stand performance, stiffness, and disability. Methodological quality and bias were evaluated. Bayesian random-effects network meta-analyses compared AE intensities, reporting standardized mean differences (Hedges' g) with 95% credible intervals. Certainty of evidence was rated using GRADE.
resultsFifteen studies were included (mean PEDro score: 5.93), showing "some concerns" or "high risk" of bias. Two meta-analyses (pain and walking performance) were conducted. Comparisons between AE intensities showed non-significant, imprecise results with very low certainty of evidence.
conclusionsEvidence is insufficient to identify the optimal AE intensity for KOA. Limitations include high risk of bias, wide credible intervals, and reliance on indirect comparisons. In this context, clinicians should apply a structured, patient-centered approach to AE prescription, considering gradual progression and monitoring of tolerance, and combine AE with other recommended interventions. High-quality trials with direct comparisons of AE intensity should be conducted for this inconclusive gap.
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.