Sanca-Valeriano · Heliyon 2023 · systematic review and meta-analysis · n=30 studies

Effect of high-intensity interval training compared to moderate-intensity continuous training on body composition and insulin sensitivity in overweight and obese adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Cited 23 times in the scientific literature.

Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials

Systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials

PubMed 37800068 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20402 · record verified 2026-08-30

What was done

A systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42021281899) was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus up to September 2022. The authors included clinical trials comparing high-intensity interval training (HIIT) with moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) in overweight and obese adults. Assessed outcomes included insulin sensitivity, body weight, BMI, body fat percentage, body fat mass (kg), and waist circumference over 4 to 16 weeks of intervention. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool.

What was found

Thirty articles met eligibility criteria. HIIT yielded a statistically significant improvement in insulin sensitivity compared to MICT (p = 0.02). No statistically significant differences were observed between modalities for body weight (p = 0.58), BMI (p = 0.53), waist circumference (p = 0.87), body fat percentage (p = 0.07), or body fat mass in kg (p = 0.39). Point estimates and confidence intervals were not reported in the abstract.

Why it matters

These findings suggest that while HIIT and MICT are equally effective for weight and fat loss in overweight and obese adults, HIIT may provide superior metabolic benefits via enhanced insulin sensitivity.

Limits

The abstract does not report effect sizes, confidence intervals, or the total number of participants. Primary studies exhibited risk of bias and substantial heterogeneity in training protocols, outcome measurements, and intervention durations. Evidence certainty was rated as moderate for most outcomes and low for waist circumference.

Cited by