Cited by 628Cardiovascular and exercise physiologyPhysical Activity and HealthCardiovascular Effects of Exercise

Review: Mortality trends in the general population: the importance of cardiorespiratory fitness

Open access
Lee, Duck-chul, Artero, Enrique G, Xuemei Sui, Blair, Steven N·2010·Journal of Psychopharmacology

Abstract

Cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) is not only an objective measure of habitual physical activity, but also a useful diagnostic and prognostic health indicator for patients in clinical settings. Although compelling evidence has shown that CRF is a strong and independent predictor of all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality, the importance of CRF is often overlooked from a clinical perspective compared with other risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes, smoking, or obesity. Several prospective studies indicate that CRF is at least as important as the traditional risk factors, and is often more strongly associated with mortality. In addition, previous studies report that CRF appears to attenuate the increased risk of death associated with obesity. Most individuals can improve their CRF through regular physical activity. Several biological mechanisms suggest that CRF improves insulin sensitivity, blood lipid profile, body composition, inflammation, and blood pressure. Based on the evidence, health professionals should encourage their patients to improve CRF through regular physical activity.

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 · 10.1177/1359786810382057

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Men unfit at both assessments had the greatest death risk; those fit at both had the least.

    “Men who were unfit at both visits had the highest death risk while men who were fit at both visits had the lowest death risk.”

    From Lack of Exercise Is a Major Cause of Chronic Diseases (2012) · cites this paper as [312]

  • The second-lowest CRF quintile had 26% higher all-cause death risk in men and 28% higher in women than the highest quintile.

    “Likewise comparing the highest CRF quintile) to the second lowest increased all-cause death risk by 26% and 28% in men and women, respectively.”

    From Lack of Exercise Is a Major Cause of Chronic Diseases (2012) · cites this paper as [312]

  • Strong evidence links lower CRF to higher death rates in both sexes, even after accounting for other risk factors.

    “Convincing evidence exists that lower CRF is associated with increased mortality in both men and women, independently of other risk factors (79, 96, 277, 312, 313).”

    From Lack of Exercise Is a Major Cause of Chronic Diseases (2012) · cites this paper as [312]

  • Becoming unfit between assessments raised death risk in men.

    “Fit-who-became-unfit between assessments had an increased risk of death.”

    From Lack of Exercise Is a Major Cause of Chronic Diseases (2012) · cites this paper as [312]

  • Men whose fitness changed between assessments had death risk between the consistently fit and consistently unfit groups.

    “men who changed fitness status between the two CRF assessments had intermediate risk of death between the fit-that-stayed-fit group and unfit-who-stayed-unfit group.”

    From Lack of Exercise Is a Major Cause of Chronic Diseases (2012) · cites this paper as [312]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lee, D.-C., Artero, E. G., Sui, X., & Blair, S. N.
Affiliations
  • University of South Carolina (US)
  • Universidad de Granada (ES)
Corresponding author
Lee, Duck-chul
Venue
Journal of Psychopharmacology
Published
2010-10-05
Volume
24
Issue
4_suppl
Pages
27-35
ISSN
  • 0269-8811 (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-7285
OpenAlex
W2074556602
Cited by
628
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 57 · 2017: 45 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 38 · 2012: 34
FWCI
6.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Scholar Commons (University of South Carolina) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Coca-Cola Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Keywords
cardiorespiratory fitness, mortality, cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, physical activity, obesity, cardiovascular risk factors, insulin sensitivity, lipid profile, inflammation, blood pressure, body composition
MeSH terms
Cardiovascular Diseases, Female, Humans, Male, Mortality, Motor Activity, Obesity, Physical Fitness, Risk Factors, Biomarkers

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