2019
DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5085(19)37943-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sa1877 – Individualised, Unsupervised Exercise Program Achieves High Levels of Compliance and Improvements in Patient Reported Outcomes - a Prospective Cohort Study in Patients with Ibd

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Reasons for exclusion from the meta-analysis were: uncontrolled trials (n = 6) [ 29 , 30 , 33 , 43 45 ], outcome measures (n = 2) [ 46 , 47 ] and a cross-over RCT design (n = 1) [ 27 ]. The latter study was excluded from the meta-analysis as guidance for incorporating cross-over trials into a meta-analysis could not be followed, in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook (Section 16.4.5), for the subsequent reasons: (1) it could not be demonstrated that the results approximate those from a paired analysis, as data was reported as median and interquartile ranges and not listed as a method of analysis for cross-over trials (Section 16.4.4), (2) a second approach including only data from the first period could not be performed as this was not reported and (3) to impute standard deviations to attempt to approximate a paired analysis was not achievable as only medians had been reported, which are often use because the data are skewed (Section 7.7.3.5).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Reasons for exclusion from the meta-analysis were: uncontrolled trials (n = 6) [ 29 , 30 , 33 , 43 45 ], outcome measures (n = 2) [ 46 , 47 ] and a cross-over RCT design (n = 1) [ 27 ]. The latter study was excluded from the meta-analysis as guidance for incorporating cross-over trials into a meta-analysis could not be followed, in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook (Section 16.4.5), for the subsequent reasons: (1) it could not be demonstrated that the results approximate those from a paired analysis, as data was reported as median and interquartile ranges and not listed as a method of analysis for cross-over trials (Section 16.4.4), (2) a second approach including only data from the first period could not be performed as this was not reported and (3) to impute standard deviations to attempt to approximate a paired analysis was not achievable as only medians had been reported, which are often use because the data are skewed (Section 7.7.3.5).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Included studies comprised of 637 participants (36% males), with the sample size ranging from 9 to 82 per intervention, 0 to 57 per control group and from 9 to 107 per study. Seven studies [ 27 , 29 31 , 33 , 45 , 47 , 52 ] included both CD and UC participants, six [ 31 , 32 , 43 , 44 , 46 , 48 ] included CD participants only and one [ 49 ] included UC participants only. Study participants were described as in remission [ 27 , 30 , 47 , 49 ], with an inactive to mildly active disease [ 28 , 29 , 31 33 , 43 , 48 , 52 ], mild to moderately active disease [ 46 ] and two studies did not specify disease status [ 44 , 45 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations