ArticleFrontiers in physiology2026
Development and content validation of a bodyweight-based HIIT training module for Chinese college students.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: Physical fitness levels among Chinese college students have declined in recent years, representing a growing public health concern. High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is a time-efficient exercise modality with well-documented physiological benefits; however, validated HIIT training modules specifically tailored for Chinese college students remain limited. Purpose: This study aimed to develop and establish the content validity of a bodyweight-based HIIT training module tailored for Chinese college students. Methods: This methodological study employed a modified Delphi technique. HIIT movements were identified through a systematic literature review of studies published between 2014 and 2025. In the first round, 10 college physical education teachers screened the identified movements for feasibility and practicality. In the second round, nine experts evaluated the retained movements using Lawshe's method to determine the Content Validity Ratio (CVR) and a four-point Likert scale to assess the Content Validity Index (CVI). Movements meeting the predefined validity thresholds were retained. Results: Twenty eligible studies were included, from which 48 HIIT movements were extracted. Following expert screening, 36 movements were excluded. Of the remaining 12 movements, eight (High Knees, Jumping Lunges, Jumping Jacks, Bodyweight Squats, Burpees, Butt Kicks, Mountain Climbers, and Push-ups) met the predefined criteria and were retained. All retained movements demonstrated acceptable item-level validity (I-CVI ≥ 0.78), and the overall scale-level validity was excellent (S-CVI = 0.976), indicating strong expert agreement. Conclusion: This study developed a bodyweight-based HIIT training module with excellent content validity for Chinese college students. The content-validated module provides a structured and accessible framework for exercise implementation and may serve as a foundation for future intervention studies to evaluate its effectiveness in improving physical fitness and related health outcomes.
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.