Frontiers in physiology · 2026
The independent effects of isolated high-intensity interval training modalities on body composition and adiposity indices in overweight or obese adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhong Jingyou, Wang Yanhao, Wu Hongliang, Chen Huangkun, Li Ming
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of different HIIT types (e.g., running vs. cycling) on weight, BMI, and body fat percentage (BF%) in individuals with obesity, while determining how duration and intensity moderate these effects for tailored prescription.
METHODS: Following PRISMA protocols, we searched databases such as Embase and Cochrane through August 2025. Eligible Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) compared HIIT against controls or moderate-intensity training. Data extraction and bias assessment (Cochrane tool) were conducted in duplicate. We synthesized data using Stata and RevMan software to determine Mean Differences (MD) and heterogeneity (I 2).
RESULTS: Fourteen studies met inclusion criteria. Pooled analysis showed HIIT significantly lowered BMI and BF% but not overall weight. Running-based interventions showed a trend toward greater improvements compared to cycling. Subgroup data suggested that short-term (3-5 weeks), frequent training (> 3x/week) at 80%-89% HRpeak (Zone 4) may favor BMI reduction. In contrast, BF% loss appeared most pronounced with longer protocols (> 12 weeks) at ≥90% HRpeak (Zone 5) performed thrice weekly, especially in men aged 30-60. However, due to small sample sizes and heterogeneity, these potentially optimal parameters should be interpreted with caution.
CONCLUSION: Running-based HIIT effectively improves body composition. Specific parameter configurations (e.g., Z4 for BMI reduction, Z5 for fat loss) demonstrate preliminary positive trends that support the future development of goal-specific exercise guidelines, though current evidence is insufficient to establish an absolute 'optimal' prescription.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD420251163797.
METHODS: Following PRISMA protocols, we searched databases such as Embase and Cochrane through August 2025. Eligible Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) compared HIIT against controls or moderate-intensity training. Data extraction and bias assessment (Cochrane tool) were conducted in duplicate. We synthesized data using Stata and RevMan software to determine Mean Differences (MD) and heterogeneity (I 2).
RESULTS: Fourteen studies met inclusion criteria. Pooled analysis showed HIIT significantly lowered BMI and BF% but not overall weight. Running-based interventions showed a trend toward greater improvements compared to cycling. Subgroup data suggested that short-term (3-5 weeks), frequent training (> 3x/week) at 80%-89% HRpeak (Zone 4) may favor BMI reduction. In contrast, BF% loss appeared most pronounced with longer protocols (> 12 weeks) at ≥90% HRpeak (Zone 5) performed thrice weekly, especially in men aged 30-60. However, due to small sample sizes and heterogeneity, these potentially optimal parameters should be interpreted with caution.
CONCLUSION: Running-based HIIT effectively improves body composition. Specific parameter configurations (e.g., Z4 for BMI reduction, Z5 for fat loss) demonstrate preliminary positive trends that support the future development of goal-specific exercise guidelines, though current evidence is insufficient to establish an absolute 'optimal' prescription.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD420251163797.