ArticleInternational journal of heart failure2026
Evaluation of Physical Capability Using the Two-Minute Step Test in Heart Failure Patients.
Article in International journal of heart failure, 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.
- The Two-Minute Step Test in Heart Failure: A Practical Step Forward, Pending Validation.International journal of heart failure · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: The six-minute walk test (6MWT) is widely used to assess functional capacity in chronic heart failure (CHF) but is limited by space and logistics. The two-minute step test (2MST) is a practical alternative. This study aimed to determine an optimal 2MST cut-off for reduced functional capacity and compare its responses with the 6MWT. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 60 clinically stable patients with CHF (mean age 51.45±12.65 years; 77% male) completed the 2MST, 6MWT, and quadriceps maximal voluntary contraction assessments. Physiological and perceptual responses were recorded at baseline, immediately after, and five minutes post-test. Receiver operating characteristic analysis determined the optimal 2MST cut-off. Adjusted regression examined functional associations, and responses were compared between tests. Results: A 2MST cut-off of ≥94 steps showed good discrimination for reduced functional capacity (area under the curve, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.92; sensitivity, 82.9%; specificity, 64.0%). In adjusted analyses, the cut-off remained independently associated with greater six-minute walk distance and lower post-exercise leg fatigue (p=0.001), but not with quadriceps strength. Compared with the 6MWT, the 2MST induced greater post-exercise leg fatigue (p<0.001), while other cardiorespiratory and perceptual responses were similar (p>0.05). Conclusions: The 2MST is a safe and feasible submaximal test for assessing functional capacity in CHF. A 94-step cut-off may help identify patients with reduced functional capacity, particularly when corridor-based testing is not feasible.
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.