Trial reportMedicine2026
The pandemic legacy face mask: hidden barrier or insignificant factor in exercise performance?: A randomized crossover trial.
Trial report in Medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedical masks serve as a barrier that prevents droplet transmission - the primary route of infection for many respiratory diseases. The effects of protective medical mask use on exercise performance and the factors influencing mask compliance are equivocal. This study aimed to examine the impact of Type I medical mask use on lower extremity endurance, exercise capacity, exercise-related parameters, and comfort levels in healthy young adults.
methodsIn this randomized crossover study, participants completed the 30-second sit-to-stand test, the incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT), and the 6-minute walk test (6MWT) in random order, both with and without a mask. Blood pressure, heart rate, percutaneous oxygen saturation (SpO2), dyspnea, and fatigue were assessed before and after each ISWT and 6MWT.
resultsA total of 79 healthy participants (mean age = 21.11 ± 1.47 years; 54 females [68.4%] and 25 males [31.6%]) were enrolled, and 74 completed the study. No significant differences were observed between conditions (with vs without a mask) for the 30-second sit-to-stand test, ISWT, or 6MWT distances (P > .05). Results revealed a significant main effect of time for all physiological variables (P < .001), while no significant condition or interaction effects were found for heart rate or blood pressure during both walking tests (P > .05). For the ISWT, a significant Time × Condition interaction was observed for SpO2 (P = .013) and perceived dyspnea/fatigue (P < .05), indicating a greater postexercise decline in SpO2 and higher symptomatic perception in the masked condition. Similarly, in the 6MWT, mask use significantly increased perceived dyspnea (P < .001), without altering the physiological trajectory.
conclusionIn healthy young adults, Type I medical mask use does not impair exercise capacity or endurance, despite increasing subjective dyspnea and fatigue. While causing a minor reduction in SpO2 during the ISWT, it remains a physiologically safe intervention that should not be considered a barrier to performance in exercise field tests.
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.