ReviewFrontiers in aging2025
Enhancing active aging through exercise: a comparative study of high-intensity interval training and continuous aerobic training benefits.
Review in Frontiers in aging, 2025. 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.
- Yoga for Neurodegenerative Disorders: Therapeutic Effects, Mechanisms, and Applications in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's Disease.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
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
Introduction: As global life expectancy increases, the importance of maintaining health and functional independence in older adults becomes paramount. This study investigates the comparative effects of High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) and Continuous Aerobic Training (CAT) on physical fitness, cognitive function, and overall wellbeing in older populations. Methods: This review analyzed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on older adults (aged 60-85) engaged in High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) and Continuous Aerobic Training (CAT). Key metrics included cardiovascular fitness, measured via VO2 max tests and 6-minute walk tests; muscle strength, assessed using handgrip dynamometry and sit-to-stand tests; and cognitive performance, evaluated with Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Trail Making Tests (TMT). Mental health was assessed using the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and quality of life was measured with the SF-36 Health Survey. A total of 18 RCTs were included. Results: Across the reviewed studies, both HIIT and CAT produced significant health benefits in older adults. HIIT led to a 15%-20% increase in VO2 max, a 12% improvement in muscle strength, and a 10%-15% enhancement in cognitive function, particularly in memory and executive tasks (MoCA scores). HIIT also reduced fall risk by 23%, likely due to its impact on dynamic balance and coordination. CAT, meanwhile, improved aerobic capacity by 10%-15% and was particularly effective in reducing depressive symptoms by 5%-10%, as measured by the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). CAT also showed moderate benefits for mental wellbeing and mood regulation. Discussion: While both HIIT and CAT show significant short-term benefits, their long-term effects need more exploration. HIIT has demonstrated sustained improvements in VO2 max and cognitive function for up to 6 months, but its long-term impact on age-related decline is unclear. CAT offers lasting benefits for aerobic capacity and mental health, though more data are needed on its effect on long-term functional independence. Future research should focus on longitudinal studies to assess the durability of these benefits and explore combining HIIT and CAT for optimal outcomes. Additionally, using wearable technology to track adherence and progress could provide valuable insights.
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.