Ó£»¨ÊÓƵ

Skip to main content

Table 2 Evidence profile

From: Effectiveness of aerobic exercise intervention on cardiovascular disease risk in female breast cancer: a systematic review with meta-analyses

Outcome

No. of participants

(studies)

Relative effect

(95% CI)

Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI)

Certainty

The control

Aerobic Exercise

Difference

The occurrence of CVD events

No. of participants: 59,050 (6 cohort trials)

RR 0.706

(0.659 to 0.757)

3.63%

6.23%

1.6% fewer

( 1.9 fewer to 1.3 fewer)

Low

The occurrence of CAD events

No. of participants: 59,050 (6 cohort trials)

RR 0.640

(0.561 to 0.729)

2.0%

1.1%

0.7% fewer

( 0.9 fewer to 0.5 fewer)

Low

VO2max of linear exercise training

No. of participants: 517 (11 RCTs)

-

Mean: 22.706 ml·kg·min−1

-

MD 1.884 ml·kg·min−1 more

(0.514 fewer to 4.283 more)

Very lowa,c

VO2max of nonlinear exercise training

No. of participants: 699 (15 RCTs)

-

Mean: 27.047 ml·kg·min−1

-

MD 5.354 ml·kg·min−1 more

(2.645 more to 8.062 more)

Very lowa,c

BMI

No. of participants: 650 (12 RCTs)

-

Mean: 28.502 kg·min−2

-

MD 0.603 kg·min−2 fewer

(1.366 fewer to 0.160 more)

Very lowa,d,e

Weight

No. of participants: 733 (11 RCTs)

-

Mean: 72.872 kg

-

MD 1.966 kg fewer

(3.839 fewer to 0.094 fewer)

Lowa,e

Fat mass of linear exercise training

No. of participants: 137 (3 RCTs)

-

Mean: 25.076 kg

-

MD 1.043 kg fewer

(4.808 fewer to 2.722 more)

Lowa,b

Fat mass of nonlinear exercise training

No. of participants: 272 (4 RCTs)

-

Mean: 25.426 kg

-

MD 4.256 kg fewer

(7.826 fewer to 0.685 fewer)

Very lowa,b,c

BF% of linear exercise training

No. of participants: 258 (6 RCTs)

-

Mean: 39.908

-

MD 0.380 more

(1.274 fewer to 2.035 more)

Lowa,b

BF% of nonlinear exercise training

No. of participants: 452 (7 RCTs)

-

Mean: 36.801

-

MD 1.748 fewer

(4.751 fewer to 1.256 more)

Very lowa,b,c

Lean mass of linear exercise training

No. of participants: 56 (2 RCTs)

-

Mean: 36.636 kg

-

MD 1.774 kg fewer

(4.011 fewer to 0.464 more)

Very lowa,b

Lean mass of nonlinear exercise training

No. of participants: 397 (5 RCTs)

-

Mean: 44.762 kg

-

MD 0.901 kg more

(2.293 fewer to 4.095 more) kg

Very lowa,b,c

Hip circumference

No. of participants: 279 (4 RCTs)

-

Mean: 85.386 cm

-

MD 2.742 cm fewer (4.278 fewer to 1.206 fewer)

Lowa,b

Waist circumference

No. of participants: 212 (4 RCTs)

-

Mean: 89.783 cm

-

MD 1.170 cm fewer

(4.838 fewer to 2.498 more)

Lowa,b

Waist-to-hip ratio

No. of participants: 170 (4 RCTs)

-

Mean: 0.827

-

MD 0.011 fewer

(0.035 fewer to 0.013 more)

Lowa,b

Triglyceride

No. of participants: 223 (5 RCTs)

-

Mean: 64.367

mg/dL

-

MD 0.315 mg/dL fewer

(3.909 fewer to 3.278 more)

Lowa,b

Total Cholesterol of nonlinear exercise training

No. of participants: 171 (5 RCTs)

-

Mean: 131.384

mg/dL

-

MD 9.577 mg/dL fewer, (42.059 fewer to 22.906 more)

Very lowa,b,c

LDL-C of linear exercise training

No. of participants: 116 (2 RCTs)

-

Mean: 78.579

mg/dL

-

MD 8.534 mg/dL fewer

(15.511 fewer to 1.557 fewer)

Lowa,b

LDL-C of nonlinear exercise training

No. of participants: 171 (3 RCTs)

-

Mean: 92.744

mg/dL

-

MD 12.895 mg/dL fewer

(59.432 fewer to 33.641 more)

Very lowa,b,c

HDL-C of linear exercise training

No. of participants: 116 (2 RCTs)

-

Mean: 35.938

mg/dL

-

MD 0.156 mg/dL more

(2.138 fewer to 2.449 more)

Very lowa,b

HDL-C of nonlinear exercise training

No. of participants: 200 (4 RCTs)

-

Mean: 48.654

mg/dL

-

MD 6.997 mg/dL more

(8.341 fewer to 22.335 more)

Very lowa,b,c

CRP of linear exercise training

No. of participants: 83 (2 RCTs)

-

Mean: 3.705

mg/dL

-

MD 0.502 mg/dL fewer

(2.651 fewer to 1.646 more)

Very lowa,b

CRP of nonlinear exercise training

No. of participants: 212 (3 RCTs)

-

Mean: 2.661

mg/dL

-

MD 0.879 mg/dL fewer

(2.388 fewer to 0.629 more)

Very lowa,b,c

LVEF(%)

No. of participants: 227 (4 RCTs)

-

Mean: 63.697

-

MD 7.081 more

(1.891 more to 12.272 more)

Very lowa,b,c

  1. CI confidence interval, MD mean difference, RCTs randomized controlled trials
  2. a All studies were assessed as having ‘Some concerns’ risk of bias
  3. b Small study sample size
  4. c Statistical heterogeneity exists, I2 &²µ³Ù; 50%
  5. d Publication bias
  6. e Clinical heterogeneity exists
  7. The bold was generated in the original form of the SoF table in the GRADE system