Cited by 128Physical Activity and HealthDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes Treatment and Management

Impact of Walking on Glycemic Control and Other Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Type 2 Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis

Open access
Qiu, Shanhu, Cai, Xue, Schumann, Uwe, Velders, Martina, Sun, Zilin, Steinacker, Jürgen Michael·2014·PLoS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Walking is the most popular and most preferred exercise among type 2 diabetes patients, yet compelling evidence regarding its beneficial effects on cardiovascular risk factors is still lacking. The aim of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was to evaluate the association between walking and glycemic control and other cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetes patients. METHODS: Three databases were searched up to August 2014. English-language RCTs were eligible for inclusion if they had assessed the walking effects (duration ≥8 weeks) on glycemic control or other cardiovascular risk factors among type 2 diabetes patients. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses based on supervision status and meta-regression analyses of variables regarding characteristics of participants and walking were performed to investigate their association with glycemic control. RESULTS: Eighteen studies involving 20 RCTs (866 participants) were included. Walking significantly decreased glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) by 0.50% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: -0.78% to -0.21%). Supervised walking was associated with a pronounced decrease in HbA1c (WMD -0.58%, 95% CI: -0.93% to -0.23%), whereas non-supervised walking was not. Further subgroup analysis suggested non-supervised walking using motivational strategies is also effective in decreasing HbA1c (WMD -0.53%, 95% CI: -1.05% to -0.02%). Effects of covariates on HbA1c change were generally unclear. For other cardiovascular risk factors, walking significantly reduced body mass index (BMI) and lowered diastolic blood pressure (DBP), but non-significantly lowered systolic blood pressure (SBP), or changed high-density or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis supports that walking decreases HbA1c among type 2 diabetes patients. Supervision or the use of motivational strategies should be suggested when prescribed walking to ensure optimal glycemic control. Walking also reduces BMI and lowers DBP, however, it remains insufficient regarding the association of walking with lowered SBP or improved lipoprotein profiles. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014009515.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0109767

Cites

48 of 48 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?

  • Low-intensity physical activities such as walking, yoga, tai-chi, qigong, and household tasks reduce hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes.

    “low-intensity PA such as walking, yoga, tai-chi, qigong, and activity for household tasks have also been shown to be effective methods of reducing hyperglycemia.”
  • A meta-analysis of 20 randomized controlled trials found walking interventions decreased A1c by 0.50% in diabetic participants, with supervised walking programs decreasing A1c by 0.58% and non-supervised walking with motivational strategies by 0.53%.

    “A meta-analysis of 20 randomized control trials showed a decrease in A1c by 0.50% with walking interventions in diabetic participants, particularly in supervised walking programs (A1c decrease 0.58%) and non-supervised walking interventions using motivational strategies (A1c decrease 0.53%).”

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
Qiu, S., Cai, X., Schumann, U., Velders, M., Sun, Z., & Steinacker, J. M.
Affiliations
  • Universität Ulm (DE)
  • Zhongda Hospital Southeast University (CN)
Corresponding author
Sun, Zilin
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2014-10-17
Volume
9
Issue
10
Pages
e109767
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2095358310
Cited by
128
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8
FWCI
0.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
walking, type 2 diabetes, glycemic control, HbA1c, cardiovascular risk factors, supervised exercise, motivational strategies, body mass index, blood pressure, lipoprotein cholesterol
MeSH terms
Blood Glucose, Blood Pressure, Body Weight, Cardiovascular Diseases, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Exercise Therapy, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Male, Risk Factors, Case-Control Studies, Walking

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