SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2026
A network meta-analysis of the effects of different aerobic exercise prescriptions on bone density in osteoporosis patients.
Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the effects of different doses of aerobic exercise on bone mineral density in osteoporosis patients through a network meta-analysis. Methods: This study systematically retrieved and screened 7 databases (including PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, etc.) for randomized controlled trials on aerobic exercise interventions for osteoporosis patients from database inception to June 2025. The study strictly followed the PRISMA guidelines, within the framework of frequency theory, we conducted a network meta-analysis using Stata 15.0 software, quality assessment of the literature using Cochrane bias risk assessment tool. Results: A total of 27 randomized controlled trials involving 2,183 participants were included in this study. The network meta-analysis revealed that aerobic exercise regimens with the following parameter: intensity (High, medium, low-to-medium and medium-to-high intensity progressive loads), training duration (24 weeks), single-session duration (30-59min), and intervention frequency (2-3, 4-5times a week) all significantly improved bone density in osteoporosis patients compared to the control group. Indirect comparison results revealed statistically significant advantages of high-intensity exercise over moderate and low-intensity exercise. The frequency of 4-5 times a week showed a significant advantage compared to 2-3 times and 6-7 times per week. No significant differences were observed between intervention frequency and duration. The Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve (SUCRA) demonstrated the following rankings: the efficacy was highest at the high intensity level, followed by the medium to high intensity level, then the low to medium intensity, the medium intensity, the Low intensity level, and the control group. For exercise duration, a 24-week intervention achieved the best efficacy, followed by a 12-week intervention, then the 48 weeks or longer, and the control group. Regarding single session intervention time, sessions lasting 30 to 59 minutes produced superior efficacy, followed by 60 minutes or longer, then the control group. In terms of weekly exercise frequency, training 4 to 5 times per week ranked first in efficacy, followed by 2 to 3 times per week, then 6 to 7 times per week, and the control group. Conclusion: The results showed that the optimal exercise dose for improving bone mineral density (BMD) in OP patients was aerobic exercise with high intensity, 30-59min per session, 4-5 times per week, and continue 24 weeks. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251155131, identifier CRD420251155131.
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.