{rfName}
Un

Indexed in

License and use

Icono OpenAccess

Citations

Altmetrics

Analysis of institutional authors

Di-Bonaventura, SilviaAuthor

Share

April 14, 2025
Publications
>
Review
Sí

Understanding Exercise-Induced Hypoalgesia: An Umbrella Review of Scientific Evidence and Qualitative Content Analysis

Publicated to:Medicina-Lithuania. 61 (3): 401- - 2025-02-25 61(3), DOI: 10.3390/medicina61030401

Authors: Gonzalez-Iglesias, Mario; Martinez-Benito, Alexis; Lopez-Vidal, Javier Andres; Melis-Romeu, Alberto; Gomez-Rabadan, Daniel Jacobo; Reina-Varona, Alvaro; Di-Bonaventura, Silvia; La Touche, Roy; Fierro-Marrero, Jose

Affiliations

Ctr Super Estudios Univ La Salle, Grp Invest Clin Docente Ciencias Rehabil INDOCLIN, Madrid 28023, Spain - Author
Inst Dolor Craneofacial & Neuromusculoesquelet IND, Madrid 28008, Spain - Author
Univ Autonoma Madrid, Ctr Super Estudios Univ La Salle, Madrid 28049, Spain - Author
Univ Autonoma Madrid, Ctr Super Estudios Univ La Salle, Mot Brains Res Grp, Madrid 28049, Spain - Author
Univ Rey Juan Carlos, Dept Phys Therapy Occupat Therapy Rehabil & Phys M, Madrid 28032, Spain - Author
Univ Rey Juan Carlos, Fac Hlth Sci, Cognit Neurosci Pain & Rehabil Res Grp NECODOR, Madrid 28922, Spain - Author
Univ Rey Juan Carlos, Int Doctorate Sch, Dept Phys Therapy Occupat Therapy & Rehabilitat &, Alcorcon 28933, Spain - Author
See more

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Exercise-induced hypoalgesia (EIH) is a topic of interest in the scientific community. This umbrella review aimed to analyze EIH research and compare it with public dissemination on X. Materials and Methods: We selected relevant EIH reviews that included a healthy population or patients with pain and studied exercise interventions. A systematic literature search was carried out in PubMed, Web of Science, SciELO, PEDro, and Google Scholar, employing the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome strategy. Data were extracted and summarized, and methodological quality was assessed with the Quality Assessment Scale for Systematic Reviews, and risk of bias with the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews tool. The Physical Activity Guidelines Advisor Committee was employed for evidence synthesis. Simultaneously, advanced X website searches gathered EIH-related content for analysis. Information from posts on X was qualitatively analyzed and contrasted with evidence in the literature. Results: We included nine systematic reviews and 17 narrative reviews. Systematic reviews presented high methodological quality. However, half had low risk of bias, while the other half presented high risk of bias. The EIH in healthy participants was controversial for some exercise modalities, such as aerobic exercise, and the influence of psychological variables. Modalities, such as isotonic resistance exercise, showed favorable effects on hypoalgesia. However, in patients with musculoskeletal pain, different exercise modalities did not generate EIH. X analysis unveiled a considerable representation of science-related content, although with prevalent misinterpretations of scientific evidence. Conclusions: EIH has been extensively studied, yet the certainty of evidence remains limited. While some exercise modalities demonstrate hypoalgesic effects in asymptomatic individuals, these effects remain unverified in patients with musculoskeletal pain. Moreover, the analysis of social media content highlights frequent misinterpretations of scientific evidence, particularly conflating hypoalgesia with analgesia. This underscores the need for more precise, evidence-based communication on social media platforms.

Keywords

AnalgesiaChronic painExerciseExercise therapyExercise-induced hypoalgesiaHealthy volunteersHumansInformation disseminationIntensitKnee osteoarthritisMechanismsMusculoskeletal painPain thresholdPeoplePhysical-activityPrevalenceSocial mediaSystematic reviewsX

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal Medicina-Lithuania due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency WoS (JCR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2025, it was in position 81/329, thus managing to position itself as a Q1 (Primer Cuartil), in the category Medicine, General & Internal.

Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-07-03:

  • The use, from an academic perspective evidenced by the Altmetric agency indicator referring to aggregations made by the personal bibliographic manager Mendeley, gives us a total of: 5.
  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 5 (PlumX).

With a more dissemination-oriented intent and targeting more general audiences, we can observe other more global scores such as:

  • The Total Score from Altmetric: 6.1.
  • The number of mentions on the social network X (formerly Twitter): 11 (Altmetric).

It is essential to present evidence supporting full alignment with institutional principles and guidelines on Open Science and the Conservation and Dissemination of Intellectual Heritage. A clear example of this is:

  • The work has been submitted to a journal whose editorial policy allows open Open Access publication.

Leadership analysis of institutional authors

There is a significant leadership presence as some of the institution’s authors appear as the first or last signer, detailed as follows: First Author () .