Trial reportPloS one2025
Comparative effects of combined aerobic and resistance training versus high-intensity interval training on insulin resistance, glycaemic control, body composition and quality of life in type 2 diabetes: A 12-week randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 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.
- Underlying mechanisms of exercise protection against diabetes mellitus: a narrative review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExercise training is a cornerstone in managing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), yet direct comparisons between combined aerobic-resistance training (A + R) and high-intensity interval training (HIIT) across clinical and patient-reported outcomes remain limited.
objectiveTo compare the effects of A + R and HIIT on insulin resistance, glycaemic control, body composition, physical function, and quality of life in adults with T2DM, relative to standard care. DESIGN AND
participantsA single-centre, randomised controlled trial involving 90 participants with T2DM (aged 30-65 years), allocated to A + R, HIIT, or control groups.
interventionsA + R consisted of moderate-intensity aerobic and resistance exercises, while HIIT comprised structured interval sessions. Both programs were delivered 3-5 times weekly for 12 weeks. The control group received usual care without structured exercise. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes included fasting insulin (FI), Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c), and insulin resistance (HOMA-IR). Secondary outcomes included fasting glucose (FG), 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), subcutaneous and visceral fat, muscle mass, and WHOQOL-BREF domains.
resultsCompared with control, the HIIT group showed a greater reduction in fasting glucose (Mean Difference [MD] -29.1 mg/dL; 95% CI -41.2 to -17.0) and the A+R group also improved (MD -20.6 mg/dL; 95% CI -31.0 to -10.2). HbA1c was lower versus control in both HIIT (MD -3.35%; 95% CI -4.11 to -2.58) and A+R (MD -3.33%; 95% CI -4.03 to -2.62). Fasting insulin decreased relative to control in HIIT (MD -7.16 mIU/L; 95% CI -10.04 to -4.28) and A+R (MD -8.87 mIU/L; 95% CI -11.77 to -5.97). HOMA-IR improved versus control in A+R (MD -2.33; 95% CI -3.63 to -1.03) with a non-significant trend in HIIT (MD -1.17; 95% CI -2.47 to 0.13). Functional capacity (6-minute walk distance) increased versus control in HIIT (MD +178.9 m; 95% CI 130.5 to 227.4) and A+R (MD +233.6 m; 95% CI 191.8 to 275.5). Body composition favored both interventions: fat-free mass increased (HIIT MD +7.54 kg; 95% CI 4.71 to 10.36; A+R MD +5.96 kg; 95% CI 3.06 to 8.86) while subcutaneous fat (HIIT MD -7.16%; 95% CI -9.33 to -4.99; A+R MD -8.37%; 95% CI -10.65 to -6.09) and visceral fat (HIIT MD -4.70%; 95% CI -5.93 to -3.47; A+R MD -4.58%; 95% CI -5.86 to -3.31) were reduced. Quality of life improved across domains versus control in both groups (e.g., physical domain: HIIT MD +10.29; 95% CI 4.06 to 16.51; A+R MD +13.77; 95% CI 6.62 to 20.91). All results were derived from covariate-adjusted mixed models with multiple comparison corrections (Benjamini-Hochberg FDR, q = 0.05; Bonferroni-adjusted α = 0.002). LIMITATIONS: Findings are limited to adherent participants, and generalizability is restricted to those without advanced complications. The 12-week duration precludes assessment of long-term sustainability.
conclusionBoth HIIT and A+R significantly improved metabolic, functional, and psychosocial outcomes compared with control. HIIT yielded greater benefits for fasting glucose and muscle mass, while A+R conferred broader improvements in HbA1c, fat reduction, and quality of life. These findings support tailoring exercise prescriptions to therapeutic goals and highlight the complementary roles of HIIT and A+R in routine diabetes care. CLINICAL
trial registrationThe trial is registered with the Clinical Trial Registry of India (reference no: CTRI/2022/04/041762).
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.