IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i24p12912-d697084.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Actual Exercise Intensity and Rating of Perceived Exertion in the Overweight and Obese Population

Author

Listed:
  • Hongli Yu

    (Department of Health and Natural Sciences, Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport, 80-336 Gdańsk, Poland)

  • Chen Sun

    (College of Physical Education, Yibin University, Yibin 644000, China)

  • Bo Sun

    (Department of Health and Natural Sciences, Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport, 80-336 Gdańsk, Poland)

  • Xiaohui Chen

    (Department of Health and Natural Sciences, Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport, 80-336 Gdańsk, Poland)

  • Zhijun Tan

    (College of Physical Education, Chengdu Sports University, Chengdu 610041, China)

Abstract

The number of overweight (OW) and obese (OB) children, adolescents, and adults has increased globally. Exercise intensity, both actual and perceived, is a significant factor in a variety of health-related investigations and rehabilitation trainings. Despite this, literature on the connection between actual exercise intensity and the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) in overweight and obese populations is lacking. A systematic review, meta-analysis, combined analysis of variance (Brown–Forsythe ANOVA), and Spearman correlation were performed to fill this gap. After preliminary assessments, ten studies were classified as having a low risk of bias and a degree of heterogeneity (I 2 = 34%; p = 0.05). The RPE scores (F = 0.032; p = 0.859), physiological index (percentage of maximal heart rate (%HR max ) (F = 0.028; p = 0.869), and percentage of maximal oxygen uptake (%VO 2max ) (F = 2.434; p = 0.136) demonstrated consistency without being significantly different between the normal weight (NW) and OW/OB groups. The RPE scores varied by age (NW (coefficient values) = 0.677 ***, OW = 0.585 **), as well as by indoor temperature (OW only, coefficient values = 0.422 *), body mass index (NW (coefficient values) = 0.516 **, OW = 0.580 **), and test time (NW only, coefficient values = 0.451 *). We conclude that RPE is appropriate for the following OW and OB people: (1) those who are older than 21.5 (the lowest age in the group of ≥18) years old and younger than 58.6 (the highest age in the group of ≥18) years old, without any other diseases, and (2) those who engage in low-intensity exercise while maintaining a standard indoor temperature. Future studies may address alternative techniques for increasing the reliability of longitudinal comparisons and gender comparisons, as well as investigate other possible confounding factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Hongli Yu & Chen Sun & Bo Sun & Xiaohui Chen & Zhijun Tan, 2021. "Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Actual Exercise Intensity and Rating of Perceived Exertion in the Overweight and Obese Population," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-20, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:24:p:12912-:d:697084
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/24/12912/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/24/12912/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    2. Douglas Bonett & Thomas Wright, 2000. "Sample size requirements for estimating pearson, kendall and spearman correlations," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 65(1), pages 23-28, March.
    3. Hobbs, M. & Griffiths, C. & Green, M.A. & Christensen, A. & McKenna, J., 2019. "Examining longitudinal associations between the recreational physical activity environment, change in body mass index, and obesity by age in 8864 Yorkshire Health Study participants," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 227(C), pages 76-83.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hongli Yu & Juan He & Anna Szumilewicz, 2022. "Pregnancy Activity Levels and Impediments in the Era of COVID-19 Based on the Health Belief Model: A Cross-Sectional Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-18, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. İlkay Unay-Gailhard & Mark A. Brennen, 2022. "How digital communications contribute to shaping the career paths of youth: a review study focused on farming as a career option," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1491-1508, December.
    2. Mahin Ghafari & Vali Baigi & Zahra Cheraghi & Amin Doosti-Irani, 2016. "The Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Iranian Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-10, June.
    3. Elizabeth T Cafiero-Fonseca & Andrew Stawasz & Sydney T Johnson & Reiko Sato & David E Bloom, 2017. "The full benefits of adult pneumococcal vaccination: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    4. Santos Urbina & Sofía Villatoro & Jesús Salinas, 2021. "Self-Regulated Learning and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    5. Oded Berger-Tal & Alison L Greggor & Biljana Macura & Carrie Ann Adams & Arden Blumenthal & Amos Bouskila & Ulrika Candolin & Carolina Doran & Esteban Fernández-Juricic & Kiyoko M Gotanda & Catherine , 2019. "Systematic reviews and maps as tools for applying behavioral ecology to management and policy," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 30(1), pages 1-8.
    6. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    7. Maryono, Maryono & Killoes, Aditya Marendra & Adhikari, Rajendra & Abdul Aziz, Ammar, 2024. "Agriculture development through multi-stakeholder partnerships in developing countries: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    8. Alene Sze Jing Yong & Yi Heng Lim & Mark Wing Loong Cheong & Ednin Hamzah & Siew Li Teoh, 2022. "Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 1037-1057, August.
    9. Xue-Ying Xu & Hong Kong & Rui-Xiang Song & Yu-Han Zhai & Xiao-Fei Wu & Wen-Si Ai & Hong-Bo Liu, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Noninvasive Biomarkers to Predict Hepatitis B-Related Significant Fibrosis and Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, June.
    10. Vicente Miñana-Signes & Manuel Monfort-Pañego & Javier Valiente, 2021. "Teaching Back Health in the School Setting: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-18, January.
    11. Agnieszka A. Tubis & Katarzyna Grzybowska, 2022. "In Search of Industry 4.0 and Logistics 4.0 in Small-Medium Enterprises—A State of the Art Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-26, November.
    12. Obsa Urgessa Ayana & Jima Degaga, 2022. "Effects of rural electrification on household welfare: a meta-regression analysis," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 69(2), pages 209-261, June.
    13. Caloffi, Annalisa & Colovic, Ana & Rizzoli, Valentina & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "Innovation intermediaries' types and functions: A computational analysis of the literature," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    14. García-Poole, Chloe & Byrne, Sonia & Rodrigo, María José, 2019. "How do communities intervene with adolescents at psychosocial risk? A systematic review of positive development programs," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 194-209.
    15. Jie Zhao & Ji Chen & Damien Beillouin & Hans Lambers & Yadong Yang & Pete Smith & Zhaohai Zeng & Jørgen E. Olesen & Huadong Zang, 2022. "Global systematic review with meta-analysis reveals yield advantage of legume-based rotations and its drivers," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    16. Qing Ye & Bao-Xin Qian & Wei-Li Yin & Feng-Mei Wang & Tao Han, 2016. "Association between the HFE C282Y, H63D Polymorphisms and the Risks of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease, Liver Cirrhosis and Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis o," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, September.
    17. Bishal Mohindru & David Turner & Tracey Sach & Diana Bilton & Siobhan Carr & Olga Archangelidi & Arjun Bhadhuri & Jennifer A. Whitty, 2020. "Health State Utility Data in Cystic Fibrosis: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 13-25, March.
    18. Subramaniam, Mega & Pang, Natalie & Morehouse, Shandra & Asgarali-Hoffman, S. Nisa, 2020. "Examining vulnerability in youth digital information practices scholarship: What are we missing or exhausting?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    19. Neal R. Haddaway & Matthew J. Page & Chris C. Pritchard & Luke A. McGuinness, 2022. "PRISMA2020: An R package and Shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020‐compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and Open Synthesis," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), June.
    20. Ding Zhu & Mindan Wu & Yuan Cao & Shihua Lin & Nanxia Xuan & Chen Zhu & Wen Li & Huahao Shen, 2018. "Heated humidification did not improve compliance of positive airway pressure and subjective daytime sleepiness in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-16, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:24:p:12912-:d:697084. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.