SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026
Comparative efficacy of traditional and modern mind-body exercises in middle-aged and older adults with knee osteoarthritis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Traditional and modern Mind-body exercise methods are widely used in the rehabilitation treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA), this network meta-analysis (NMA) compared the relative efficacy of various Mind-body exercise methods on KOA-related pain, function and stiffness, as well as psychological and physical outcomes. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched up to December 1, 2025. The main outcome measures included WOMAC pain score, WOMAC physical function score and WOMAC stiffness score. Secondary outcome indicators included mental health status, 6-min walking test (6MWT) and timed up-and-go test (TUG). RoB 2 was used to evaluate the risk of bias, and CINeMA was used to evaluate the certainty of network evidence. This research scheme has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261281876). Results: A total of 29 RCTs ( Conclusion: Different Mind-body exercises may provide outcome-specific benefits for KOA, particularly in middle-aged and older adults. Tai Chi and Wuqinxi appeared more favorable for pain relief, Pilates had the highest probability of improving physical function, Baduanjin appeared favorable for stiffness, and Yijinjing showed the highest ranking probability for mental health. Given the clinical diversity across trials and the low or very low certainty of several comparisons, SUCRA rankings should be interpreted cautiously. Specifically, TUG-related ranking results should be considered exploratory because the TUG network did not form a closed loop and inconsistency testing could not be performed; therefore, they should not be interpreted as definitive evidence. Further high-quality, long-term RCTs are needed to strengthen the evidence and support more precise exercise prescriptions.
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.