↓ Skip to main content

Moderating Effects of Exercise Duration and Intensity in Neuromuscular vs. Endurance Exercise Interventions for the Treatment of Depression: A Meta-Analytical Review

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
25 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Readers on

mendeley
124 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Moderating Effects of Exercise Duration and Intensity in Neuromuscular vs. Endurance Exercise Interventions for the Treatment of Depression: A Meta-Analytical Review
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00305
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lukas Nebiker, Eric Lichtenstein, Alice Minghetti, Lukas Zahner, Markus Gerber, Oliver Faude, Lars Donath

Abstract

Background: Exercise training is a beneficial treatment strategy for depression. Previous meta-analytical reviews mainly examined the effect of aerobic exercise on depressive symptoms neglecting comparisons with neuromuscular training and meta-regression considering relevant exercise training prescriptors such as exercise duration, intensity, number of exercise sessions (volume) and frequency. Methods: A structured literature search was conducted in biomedical and psychological databases and study selection was conducted following the PICOS approach. (Randomized) controlled trials that compared supervised neuromuscular or endurance exercise interventions with an inactive control group (CON) in clinically depressed in- or out-patients over 18 years were included. Eligibility and study quality were evaluated by two independent researchers. Standardized mean differences (SMD) for the reduction of depressive symptoms, measured with different evaluation scales (e.g., BDI, HAM-D, PHQ-9, HRSD, MADRS, GDS) were calculated with the adjusted Hedges'g equation as main outcome for the comparison of endurance and neuromuscular exercise interventions vs. CON. Statistical analyses were conducted using a random effects inverse-variance model. Multivariate meta-regression analysis was performed in order to examine the modulating effects of exercise training prescriptors. Results: Twenty seven trials with 1,452 clinically depressed adults were included. 20 out of 27 included trials reached a PEDro score of at least 6, representing high-quality. Irrespective of the exercise mode and study quality, large effects in favor of exercise compared to the control condition were found. Compared to CON, sensitivity analyses revealed a moderate to large effect in favor of endurance exercise [SMD: -0.79 (90% CI: -1.10, -0.48); p < 0.00001, I2 = 84%] and a large effect size in favor of neuromuscular exercise [SMD: -1.14 (90 CI: -1.50, -0.78); p < 0.00001, I2 = 80%]. These effects decreased to moderate for endurance and remained large for neuromuscular trials when considering studies of high quality, indicating a significant difference (p = 0.04). Multivariate meta- regression revealed that exercise duration in endurance trials and exercise intensity in neuromuscular trials had a significantly moderating effect. Conclusions: Strong neuromuscular exercise interventions can be slightly more effective than endurance exercise interventions. Interestingly, exercise duration and exercise intensity moderated the effect size meaningfully. This result might be used on exercise in depression to increase efficacy.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 124 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 15%
Student > Bachelor 19 15%
Researcher 10 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 6%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 39 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 15%
Sports and Recreations 17 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 8%
Neuroscience 5 4%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 48 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,012,235
of 23,460,553 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#526
of 10,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,291
of 329,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#12
of 170 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,460,553 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,991 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 170 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.