SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2020
Lack of Cited Evidence Underpinning Recommendations for Objective Assessment of Cardiovascular Function to Inform Exercise Prescription: A Systematic Review.
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. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe effectiveness of exercise in managing cardiovascular (CV) health and function is well established. Less clear is the process for optimising the safety and efficacy of an intervention, particularly how objective assessments might inform this process.
objectiveThe aim of this review was to investigate the cited evidence underpinning recommendations for assessing CV function to inform the safe and effective prescription of exercise in populations with established CV disease, as published in documents to guide practice authored by prominent organisations in cardiology and sports medicine.
methodsA systematic review of position statements and guiding documents on exercise prescription for CV health was conducted. Included documents were published between 1997 and 2016.
resultsFollowing removal of duplicates, 3158 documents were considered, with full-text screening required for 334. Twenty-seven documents were included which provided 106 individual recommendations for specific objective assessments. Of the total number of recommendations, 60% had no accompanying citation and 28% of recommendations provided citations that did not directly support the statement made. Additionally, 52% of included documents did not state the methods of document development. That is, it was not clear if there was a literature review and/or expert consensus that was used to form recommendations included within.
conclusionAlmost no cited evidence underpinning the extracted recommendations from the included guiding documents, nor any acknowledgement of this deficiency was established. There were limited explanations found for the methods involved in developing such guiding documents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32297250What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.