You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 53, Issue 16
  • Reply to the comments on: concurrent aerobic plus resistance exercise versus aerobic exercise alone to improve health outcomes in paediatric obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Letter in response to
Reply to the comments on: concurrent aerobic plus resistance exercise versus aerobic exercise alone to improve health outcomes in paediatric obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis
  1. Antonio García-Hermoso1,
  2. Robinson Ramírez-Vélez2,
  3. Rodrigo Ramírez-Campillo3,4,5,
  4. Mark D Peterson6,7,
  5. Vicente Martínez-Vizcaíno8
  1. 1 Laboratorio de Ciencias de la Actividad Física, el Deporte y la Salud, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH, Santiago, Chile
  2. 2 Centro de Estudios para la Medición de la Actividad Física (CEMA), Escuela de Medicina y Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad del Rosario, Bogota, Colombia
  3. 3 Departamento de Ciencias de la Actividad Física, Universidad de Los Lagos, Osorno, Chile
  4. 4 Laboratorio de Medición y Evaluación Deportiva, Núcleo de Investigación en Salud, Actividad Física y Deporte, Universidad de Los Lagos, Osorno, Chile
  5. 5 Unidad de Fisiología Integrativa, Laboratorio del Ciencias del Ejercicio, Clínica MEDS, Santiago, Chile
  6. 6 Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
  7. 7 Global REACH, University of Michigan Medical School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
  8. 8 Social and Health Care Research Center, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Cuenca, Spain
  1. Correspondence to Dr Antonio García-Hermoso, Laboratorio de Ciencias de la Actividad Física, el Deporte y la Salud, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH, Santiago 3363, Chile; antonio.garcia.h{at}usach.cl

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2018-099416

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Dear Editor,

    We appreciate the interest in our recent meta-analysis1 and welcome the opportunity to reply.2

    First, with regard to methodological quality of the studies included in our systematic review, we totally agree with the comment regarding the need for a specific tool to evaluate the risk of bias in non-randomised intervention studies. Despite the low quality, no trials were excluded according to this quality. In our meta-analysis, we chose to include all studies and to …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors AGH conceptualised and designed the study, drafted the initial manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. All authors revised the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent Not required.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Copyright information:

    © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2019. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.