Ren · Frontiers in endocrinology 2026 · systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials · n=21 studies (831 participants)

Comparative effectiveness of high-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Cited 0 times in the scientific literature.

Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PubMed 42211454 · doi:10.3389/fendo.2026.1833684 · record verified 2026-08-29

What was done

Authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis searching PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang up to October 2025. They included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) versus Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training (MICT) or non-exercise controls on glycemic and metabolic parameters in patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM). Two reviewers independently conducted screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments, synthesizing data with RevMan 5.4 across 21 RCTs comprising 831 patients.

What was found

Compared to control groups, both HIIT and MICT significantly reduced fasting blood glucose (FBG) and increased maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 max). HIIT also significantly reduced HbA1c and BMI, and increased HDL. Comparing exercise modalities directly, HIIT led to significantly greater reductions in FBG and larger increases in VO2 max than MICT. Both HIIT and MICT reduced HbA1c, with no statistically significant difference between modalities. There were also no statistically significant differences between HIIT and MICT for BMI, LDL, or HDL. The abstract reports no numerical effect sizes, point estimates, or confidence intervals.

Why it matters

This review suggests that while both continuous and interval training improve metabolic control in type 2 diabetes, HIIT may offer distinct advantages for improving cardiorespiratory fitness and fasting blood glucose.

Limits

The abstract provides directional conclusions only, omitting all numerical effect sizes, confidence intervals, and p-values. The included trials were small (averaging approximately 40 participants per study), and the authors note limitations regarding the overall quality and volume of the primary studies. Long-term adherence, adverse events, and specific exercise protocols were not described.

Cited by