ReviewJSAMS plus2025
Highlighting gaps in the reporting of aerobic exercise interventions for mild traumatic brain injury: A systematic review using the TIDieR-Rehab checklist.
Review in JSAMS plus, 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.
- Delivering Virtual Group Interventions for Youth With Persisting Symptoms After Concussion (Move&Connect-Youth) and Their Caregivers (Move&Connect-Caregivers): Fidelity and Engagement Evaluation.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2026Article
- Focus on female athletes and special issue on physical activity in people with disability.JSAMS plus · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To assess intervention reporting quality in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing aerobic exercise with control interventions following mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Methods: Five databases were systematically searched for RCTs that compared the effect of aerobic exercise interventions with no intervention or another control, on symptom severity or recovery, in adolescents or adults with mTBI. Two reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data, and rated reporting quality using the TIDieR-Rehab checklist. Reporting completeness was quantified by intervention group and TIDieR-Rehab item. Authors were contacted to determine if reporting could be improved. Results: Within 13 included studies, overall reporting was moderate (62 % of TIDieR-Rehab items complete). Dosage items 'Frequency' (85 %) and 'Intervention length' (96 %) were well reported, whereas 'Session duration', 'Essential elements amount', 'How challenging', and 'Regression/Progression' were moderately reported (54 %-65 % complete). Personalisation and protocol deviations were poorly reported (12 %-23 %). On average, authors supplied 71 % of missing intervention details on request. Conclusions: The TIDieR-Rehab checklist revealed critical reporting gaps. Incomplete reporting of aerobic exercise parameters hinders clinical translation and limits investigation of optimal dosage parameters and underlying mechanisms. Poor reporting of personalisation and protocol deviations may mask necessary adaptations for individuals with mTBI. To improve reporting in this field, it is recommended that researchers utilise the TIDieR-Rehab checklist when planning and reporting their studies.
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.