Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31529301›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2020

DNA Damage Following Acute Aerobic Exercise: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Despoina V Tryfidou, Conor McClean, Michalis G Nikolaidis, Gareth W Davison

Erratum issuedAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 50 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Exercise attenuates the hallmarks of aging: Novel perspectives.Journal of sport and health science · 2025
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Despoina V TryfidouSport and Exercise Sciences Research Institute, Ulster University, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, Northern Ireland, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6818-2697
Conor McCleanSport and Exercise Sciences Research Institute, Ulster University, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, Northern Ireland, UK.
Michalis G NikolaidisDepartment of Physical Education and Sports Science at Serres, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Serres, Greece.
Gareth W DavisonSport and Exercise Sciences Research Institute, Ulster University, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, Northern Ireland, UK. gw.davison@ulster.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExercise is widely recognised for its health enhancing benefits. Despite this, an overproduction of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species (RONS), outstripping antioxidant defence mechanisms, can lead to a state of (chronic) oxidative stress. DNA is a vulnerable target of RONS attack and, if left unrepaired, DNA damage may cause genetic instability.

objectiveThis meta-analysis aimed to systematically investigate and assess the overall effect of studies reporting DNA damage following acute aerobic exercise.

methodsWeb of Science, PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus were searched until April 2019. Outcomes included (1) multiple time-points (TPs) of measuring DNA damage post-exercise, (2) two different quantification methods (comet assay and 8-oxo-2'-deoxyguanosine; 8-OHdG), and (3) protocols of high intensity (≥ 75% of maximum rate of oxygen consumption; VO

resultsLiterature search identified 4316 non-duplicate records of which 35 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The evidence was strong, showcasing an increase in DNA damage immediately following acute aerobic exercise with a large-effect size at TP 0 (0 h) (SMD = 0.875; 95% CI 0.5, 1.25; p < 0.05). When comparing between comet assay and 8-OHdG at TP 0, a significant difference was observed only when using the comet assay. Finally, when isolating protocols of long-distance and high-intensity exercise, increased DNA damage was only observed in the latter. (SMD = 0.48; 95% CI - 0.16, 1.03; p = 0.15 and SMD = 1.18; 95% CI 0.71, 1.65; p < 0.05 respectively).

conclusionsA substantial increase in DNA damage occurs immediately following acute aerobic exercise. This increase remains significant between 2 h and 1 day, but not within 5-28 days post-exercise. Such an increase was not observed in protocols of a long-distance. The relationship between exercise and DNA damage may be explained through the hormesis theory, which is somewhat one-dimensional, and thus limited. The hormesis theory describes how exercise modulates any advantageous or harmful effects mediated through RONS, by increasing DNA oxidation between the two end-points of the curve: physical inactivity and overtraining. We propose a more intricate approach to explain this relationship: a multi-dimensional model, to develop a better understanding of the complexity of the relationship between DNA integrity and exercise.

Indexed as

DNA DamageExerciseHumans

Identifiers

PMID31529301
PMCPMC6942015

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.