ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2026
A Retrospective Controlled Study on the Effects of Four-Limb Linkage Training on Clinical Efficacy and Antioxidative Mechanisms in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.
Article in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Four-Limb Coordinated Training and Neuroplasticity in Older Adults with Cognitive Frailty: Mechanisms and Clinical Evidence.Clinical interventions in aging · 2026Review
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 investigate the effects of systematic four-limb linkage training on pulmonary function, exercise capacity, dyspnea, and quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and to explore its potential antioxidative mechanisms. Methods: This retrospective controlled study included 114 patients with COPD admitted between August 2023 and April 2025. Patients were divided into a control group (n=57), receiving lower-limb cycling training, and an observation group (n=57), receiving four-limb linkage training. Both groups underwent continuous rehabilitation intervention for 8 weeks. Pulmonary function indices (FEV1, FVC, FEV1/FVC, FEV1%pred), dyspnea scores (modified Medical Research Council and Borg scales), exercise capacity (6-minute walking distance, 6MWD), disease severity (BODE index), quality of life (St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire, SGRQ), and oxidative stress markers [thioredoxin (TRX) and thioredoxin-interacting protein (TXNIP) at mRNA and protein levels] were assessed at Pre-intervention and Post 8-week intervention. Results: At Post 8-week intervention, pulmonary function indices, exercise capacity, and quality-of-life scores were significantly improved, while dyspnea scores and BODE index were significantly reduced in both groups compared with Pre-intervention (P<0.05). The magnitude of improvement was significantly greater in the four-limb linkage training group than in the control group (P<0.05). In addition, TRX mRNA and protein expression levels were significantly increased, whereas TXNIP mRNA and protein expression levels were significantly decreased at Post 8-week intervention compared with Pre-intervention, with more pronounced changes observed in the observation group (P<0.05). Conclusion: Four-limb linkage training significantly improves pulmonary function, exercise capacity, dyspnea, and quality of life in patients with COPD. These benefits may be mediated, at least in part, by enhanced antioxidative activity through upregulation of TRX and suppression of TXNIP. Compared with lower-limb training alone, four-limb linkage training provides a more comprehensive rehabilitation strategy for COPD management.
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.