SynthesisEndocrine2026
Effects of concurrent training sequence on cardiometabolic risk factors in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Endocrine, 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
purposeConcurrent training (CT), combining aerobic and resistance exercise, is recommended for managing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, whether the sequence of CT-aerobic training followed by resistance training (CART) or the reverse order (CRAT)-influences cardiometabolic outcomes remains unclear. This study compared the effects of CT sequences on cardiometabolic risk factors in T2DM using network meta-analysis (NMA).
methodsAn NMA of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to January 2026 was conducted using five databases. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data. Data were analysed using Stata 16.0.
resultsTwenty-seven RCTs (n = 965) were included. Both CART and CRAT significantly improved body fat percentage, HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein compared with control (all p < 0.05). Based on unadjusted SUCRA probabilities, CRAT ranked highest for body composition, glycaemic control, insulin resistance, and most lipid outcomes, whereas CART ranked highest for systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Sensitivity analyses indicated that intervention duration influenced rankings for body composition, whereas participant sex influenced rankings for blood pressure. Meta‑regression further suggested that participant age might modify the relative efficacy of these sequences for BMI, HbA1c, and blood pressure, warranting cautious interpretation of unadjusted rankings.
conclusionsBoth CT sequences improve cardiometabolic risk factors in T2DM. Although SUCRA rankings varied across outcomes, these findings are exploratory and do not establish superiority of either sequence. Meta-regression suggested that participant characteristics and training factors may partly account for ranking differences. Given the non-significant direct comparisons and low certainty of evidence according to CINeMA, current evidence does not support a definitive recommendation for one training sequence over the other. Future head-to-head trials are warranted.
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD420261293127. Registered 25 January 2026.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42804093What 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.