SynthesisSystematic reviews2025
Effectiveness of inspiratory muscle training and multicomponent physical training in patients with post-COVID conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Impact of Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Patients with Post-COVID-19 Syndrome: A Systematic Review.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Impacts of Post-Covid Condition (PCC) in Sweden: a cross-sectional observational survey study.BMC public health · 2026Observational
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
Abstract
backgroundThere is evidence that fatigue and dyspnea are among the most frequently reported symptoms of post-COVID condition. Therefore, several studies have investigated respiratory muscle or global peripheral muscle training as strategies to manage those symptoms. Despite evidence of potential benefits, conflicting results persist due to the heterogeneity of rehabilitation protocols and assessment tools. Thereby, the objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of inspiratory muscle training and multicomponent physical training in adults with dyspnea and fatigue for at least 12 weeks after COVID-19.
methodA search was conducted in September 2024, in the Cochrane Library (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, PEDro, Lilacs/BVS, Web of Science, Scopus, and Epistemonikos databases. The inclusion criteria were randomized clinical trials published in any language that evaluated the effectiveness of inspiratory muscle training and multicomponent physical training to improve fatigue, dyspnea, and/or physical function in adults with persistent post-COVID symptoms. The risk of bias of the included studies and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using the RoB 2 and GRADE tools, respectively.
resultsAfter the screening process, seven randomized clinical trials were included. The total number of participants included in the studies was 449. Inspiratory muscle training significantly improved inspiratory muscle strength (maximal inspiratory pressure) (MD = 22.70; 95% CI: 13.78 to 31.62), and cardiopulmonary capacity (
conclusionInspiratory muscle training improved cardiorespiratory outcomes, while multicomponent physical training improved muscle strength, physical functioning, and fatigue. Both types of training improve physical functioning. The certainty of evidence for the outcomes evaluated was low. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42023451057).
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.