2020
DOI: 10.1097/jsm.0000000000000606
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Phototherapy on Management of Creatine Kinase Activity in General Versus Localized Exercise: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract: The available evidence suggest that phototherapy has beneficial effects on the management of CK activity and demonstrate a possible relationship based on damage caused by exercise, providing a greater effect in studies that used localized exercise.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
24
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
1
24
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The total score ranges from zero to 10 points, in which higher scores represent better methodological quality. A PEDro score equal to or greater than 7 was considered "high quality", studies whose scores were 5 or 6 were considered "moderate quality" and those whose score was 4 or less were considered "poor quality" [25,26].…”
Section: Methodological Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The total score ranges from zero to 10 points, in which higher scores represent better methodological quality. A PEDro score equal to or greater than 7 was considered "high quality", studies whose scores were 5 or 6 were considered "moderate quality" and those whose score was 4 or less were considered "poor quality" [25,26].…”
Section: Methodological Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In summary, the GRADE classification was based on 4 factors: design limitations [75% of study participants with high methodological quality (PEDro score 7 points)], inconsistent results (75% participants from studies with findings in the same direction ), imprecision (300 participants for each group), and publication bias (meta-analyses with more than 10 studies). Overall quality of evidence was defined as high quality (further study is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect), moderate quality (further study is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate), low quality (further study is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate) and very low quality (any estimate is very uncertain) [25].…”
Section: Methodological Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The following items were considered and reported: potential selection bias (regarding sequence and concealment of allocation), performance bias (blinding of subjects and researches), detection bias (blinding evaluation of results), friction bias (incomplete result data), report bias (selective result report), and other bias. Thus, for each item described, the studies received possible ratings: low, high or unclear risk (when the information presented in the study was not su cient to assess a particular area) [19].…”
Section: Risk Of Bias Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the surprising, remarkable and rapid progress of knowledge in this field, which culminated in the publication of three systematic reviews with meta-analyses26–28 highlighting not only the ergogenic effects of PBMT and PBMT/sMF but also its protective effects,28 there are some key aspects that remain unknown and must be investigated. Among them, we highlight the potentially beneficial effects of PBMT/sMF during the detraining period after strength-training protocols.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%