SynthesisNPJ primary care respiratory medicine2025
Comparative efficacy of pulmonary rehabilitation delivery models on dyspnoea, exercise capacity and health-related quality of life in chronic respiratory disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in NPJ primary care respiratory medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effects of Pulmonary Rehabilitation Nursing on Pulmonary Function and Exercise Capacity in Patients With COPD: A Meta-Analysis.Nursing in critical care · 2026Pooled it
- An Evidence Summary of Health Education in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Practice-Oriented Assessment with Inter-Rater Reliability.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2026Pooled it
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
This systematic review aimed to systematise the different models used to deliver pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) during chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs) and explore which ones are the most effective in terms of dyspnea, exercise capacity, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The literature search strategy involved structured searches of PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for relevant articles published from January 2013 to March 2025. The risk of bias was assessed using ROB 2.0. Descriptive analysis and meta-analysis were performed. Forest plots and the node-splitting model presented results. Network meta-analysis was conducted in R 4.3.2. 33 studies(n = 2538) were included in this review and of those, 27 studies(n = 2106) were used for meta-analysis. 22 (66.7%) studies were at high risk of bias and the certainty of evidence for all outcomes (6MWT, dyspnea, HRQoL) was rated as low due to study limitations and imprecision. Compared with usual care, PR patients have significant improvement on 6MWT as well as mMRC (both P < 0.01). The cumulative ranking probability curves and forest plot analyses revealed a hierarchical efficacy profile among rehabilitation modalities for CRDs, with outpatient presented the larger effects on mMRC (mean difference (MD)= -0.82, 95%Cl [-1.45, -0.19]), 6MWT(MD = 65.45, 95%Cl [45.06, 85.84]). Our findings suggest that PR probably improves exercise capacity and reduces dyspnea in patients with CRDs, with outpatient-based programmes generally showing the largest effects, while the high risk of bias limits interpretation of this finding.PROSPERO ID: CRD420251013615.
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.