SynthesisFrontiers in nutrition2026
The effect of exercise snacks on cardiorespiratory fitness, body composition, metabolic health, and muscle strength in sedentary individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in nutrition, 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: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effects of exercise snacks (ES) on cardiorespiratory fitness, body composition, metabolic health, and muscle strength in sedentary individuals. Methods: From database inception to February 5, 2026, four international databases (PubMed, Web of Science, SciELO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and one Chinese database (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) were searched. The GRADE approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence, while the Cochrane Risk of Bias tools (RoB 2) and Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Intervention (ROBINS-I) were applied to evaluate the quality of randomized controlled trials and non-randomized studies, respectively. The pooled effects of study outcomes were estimated using a random-effects model based on meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were conducted to explore potential moderating variables. Results: A total of 22 studies involving 994 participants were included. The meta-analysis showed that ES significantly improved VO Conclusion: As a short-duration, high-frequency intervention, ES may improve cardiorespiratory fitness and certain metabolic health indicators in sedentary individuals. However, the finding for VO Systematic review registration: PROSPERO (CRD420261347411).
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.