ReviewPostepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology2025
High-intensity interval training in rehabilitation of patients after myocardial infarction: a rapid review of randomized trials.
Review in Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Joint association of depression and physical activity with incident cardiometabolic multimorbidity (CMM) among middle-aged and older adults in China.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Sex and Gender-Based Differences in Outcomes of Cardiac Rehabilitation Following Acute Myocardial Infarction.Current atherosclerosis reports · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The debate surrounding the use of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) for patients who have survived myocardial infarction (MI) is ongoing due to concerns regarding safety and long-term efficacy. Aim: This review presents an overview of the safety, effectiveness, and clinical applicability of HIIT compared to other training methods used in CR after MI. Methods: This rapid systematic review included randomized controlled trials published until January 20, 2025, in PubMed and Web of Science. Eligible studies used a HIIT protocol, involved adults (≥ 18 years) with a history of MI who participated in a HIIT or other (control) training program, and reported physiological and psychological outcomes. Results: Sixteen studies with 597 participants ( Conclusions: HIIT may be an efficient and time-saving approach for CR, particularly in highly motivated and stable cardiovascular patients. HIIT protocols must be tailored by clinicians and progressively intensified based on tolerance and recovery. Future research should focus on optimizing HIIT protocols and determining their long-term safety and compliance.
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.