ReviewERJ open research2026
Home-based rehabilitation in interstitial lung disease: picturing the present and drawing the future through a systematic review of the literature.
Review in ERJ open research, 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
Background: Rehabilitation represents a key nonpharmacological treatment for patients with interstitial lung diseases (ILDs). As a consequence of improvement in technologies and social distancing in the SARS-CoV-2 era, a growing body of evidence demonstrated the effectiveness of tele-rehabilitation programmes for chronic respiratory diseases. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on tele-rehabilitation in ILD and extended the search to ongoing trials. Results: Throughout our research, we identified four RCTs describing home rehabilitation in ILD. All RCTs were heterogenous small trials. Thus, a meta-analysis could not be performed, and data were reported in a descriptive way. The primary outcomes of the RCTs analysed included both physical and functional measures. We also identified through ClinicalTrials.gov four ongoing clinical trials investigating pulmonary rehabilitation in ILD with a considerable degree of heterogeneity regarding the populations included. In our systematic review, we also highlighted the key pillars for future trials in the field. Conclusion: Potential treatment trajectories on outcomes of ILD patients related to the implementation of tele-rehabilitation are also discussed.
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.