Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comment on: “Low Cardiorespiratory Fitness Post‐COVID‐19: A Narrative Review”

  • Letter to the Editor
  • Published:
Sports Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Letter to the Editor to this article was published on 08 September 2023

A Review Article was published on 17 September 2022

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Availability of Data and Materials

Not applicable.

References

  1. Schwendinger F, Knaier R, Radtke T, Schmidt-Trucksäss A. Low cardiorespiratory fitness post-COVID-19: a narrative review. Sports Med. 2023;53:51–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gomes-Neto M, Conceição LSR, Gois CO, Carvalho VO. Comment on: “Low cardiorespiratory fitness post-COVID-19: a narrative review.” Sports Med. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-023-01845-w.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Schwendinger F, Knaier R, Radtke T, Schmidt-Trucksäss A. Response to Comment on: “Low cardiorespiratory fitness post-COVID-19: a narrative review.” Sports Med. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-023-01848-7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gurevitch J, Koricheva J, Nakagawa S, Stewart G. Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis. Nature. 2018;555:175–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ma L-L, Wang Y-Y, Yang Z-H, Huang D, Weng H, Zeng X-T. Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better? Mil Med Res. 2020;7:7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Pigott TD, Polanin JR. Methodological guidance paper: high-quality meta-analysis in a systematic review. Review of educational research. Am Educ Res Assoc. 2020;90:24–46.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Shorten A, Shorten B. What is meta-analysis? Evidence-based nursing. R Coll Nurs. 2013;16:3–4.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author thanks the scholarship offered by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) (scholarship number 2022/07280-8).

Funding

No specific sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this letter.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Physical Education and Sport of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Bandeirantes Avenue nº 3900, University Campus—Monte Alegre, Ribeirão Preto, SP, 14030-680, Brazil

    Leonardo Santos Lopes da Silva

Authors
  1. Leonardo Santos Lopes da Silva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

The author read and approved the final version of this letter.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leonardo Santos Lopes da Silva.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares that they have no competing interests.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for Publication

Not applicable.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

da Silva, L.S.L. Comment on: “Low Cardiorespiratory Fitness Post‐COVID‐19: A Narrative Review”. Sports Med 53, 2529–2530 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-023-01921-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-023-01921-1

Search

Navigation