Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 367

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 74 of the 74 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Physical training for asthma

Ram, Felix SF, Robinson, Stewart, Black, Peter N, Picot, Joanna·2005·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Physical training programmes have been designed for asthmatic subjects with the aim of improving physical fitness, neuromuscular coordination and self-confidence. Habitual physical activity increases physical fitness and lowers ventilation during mild and moderate exercise thereby reducing the likelihood of provoking exercise induced asthma. Exercise training may also reduce the perception of breathlessness through a number of mechanisms including strengthening respiratory muscles. Subjectively, many asthmatics report that they are symptomatically better when fit, but results from trials have varied and have been difficult to compare because of different designs and training protocols. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this review was to assess evidence for the efficacy and effectiveness of physical training in asthma. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register, SportDiscus and the Science Citation Index up to May 2005. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials in asthmatic subjects undertaking physical training. Subjects had to be eight years and older. Physical training had to be undertaken for at least 20 to 30 minutes, two to three times a week, over a minimum of four weeks. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Eligibility for inclusion and quality of trials were assessed independently by two reviewers. MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen studies (455 participants) were included in this review. Physical training had no effect on resting lung function or the number of days of wheeze. The results of this review have shown that lung function and wheeze is not worsened by physical training in patients with asthma. Physical training improved cardiopulmonary fitness as measured by an increase in maximum oxygen uptake of 5.4 ml/kg/min (95% confidence interval 4.2 to 6.6) and maximum expiratory ventilation 6.0 L/min (95% confidence interval 1.5 to 10.4). There were no data concerning quality of life measurements. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In people with asthma, physical training can improve cardiopulmonary fitness without changing lung function. It is not known whether improved fitness is translated into improved quality of life. It is comforting to know that physical training does not have an adverse effect on lung function and wheeze in patients with asthma. Therefore, there is no reason why patients with asthma should not participate in regular physical activity.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd001116.pub2

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 74 references

Cited by

See all 367

Metadata

Authors
Ram, F. S., Robinson, S., Black, P. N., & Picot, J.
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Published
2005-10-19
Issue
4
Pages
CD001116-CD001116
ISSN
1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2801549129
Cited by
367
References
74
Type
reference entry
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Physical training for asthma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd001116.pub2
The paper
Ram, F. S., Robinson, S., Black, P. N., & Picot, J. (2005). Physical training for asthma. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd001116.pub2

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.