ArticleBMJ open2024
Comparative efficacy and acceptability of different exercise patterns for reducing cardiovascular events in pre-diabetes: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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.
- Facilitators, barriers, and interventions for exercise adherence in patients with prediabetes: a mixed-methods systematic review.Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism · 2026Review
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
introductionExercise has been used to reverse dysglycaemic states in patients with pre-diabetes. Systematic reviews show that exercise is an effective way to reduce the incidence of diabetes, but there is conflicting evidence for reducing the occurrence of cardiovascular events. Therefore, we present a systematic review and network meta-analysis protocol designed to compare the effectiveness of different forms of exercise in reducing cardiovascular events and their tolerability in different populations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will include all randomised controlled trials and compare one exercise intervention to another. We will compare the following exercise patterns: standard endurance training, strength training, high-intensity interval training, mind-body exercise, and mixed strength and aerobic training. The primary outcomes are the occurrence of major cardiovascular events and the rate of patient attrition during the intervention. We will search major English and Chinese databases as well as trial registry websites for published and unpublished studies. All reference selection and data extraction will be conducted by at least two independent reviewers. We will conduct a random effects model to combine effect sizes and use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and the mean ranks to rank the effectiveness of interventions. All data will be fitted at WinBUGS in a Bayesian framework and correlation graphs will be plotted using StataSE 14. We will also use the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to evaluate the quality of evidence for the study results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study does not involve a population-based intervention, and therefore, does not require ethical approval. We will publish the findings of this systematic review in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, and the dataset will be made available free of charge. The completed review will be disseminated electronically in print and on social media, where appropriate. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023422737.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.