Objective: This study systematically examined the effects of recreational football on body composition and cardiometabolic health in overweight or obese individuals via subgroup analyses of potential moderators. Methods: A systematic search was conducted across six databases (PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang Data) in May and July 2025 to identify controlled trials evaluating recreational football among overweight or obese individuals. A meta-analysis was performed to pool the effect estimates, reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs), with heterogeneity explored through subgroup analyses. Results: Recreational football interventions across 32 studies (1126 participants, aged 11–68) led to significant improvements in body composition and cardiometabolic health. The training programs ranged from 4 to 48 weeks, with sessions lasting 4 to 30 min. Key body composition outcomes included reductions in body weight (SMD = −0.51), body mass index (SMD = −0.41), body fat percentage (SMD = −0.53), fat mass (SMD = −0.40), and waist circumference (SMD = −1.43), along with increases in lean body mass (SMD = 0.18). The effects were more pronounced in females and younger participants (≤18 years). Cardiometabolic benefits included reductions in systolic blood pressure (SMD = −0.59), diastolic blood pressure (SMD = −0.75), and mean arterial pressure (SMD = −0.91), as well as resting heart rates (SMD = −0.85), especially among females, obese males, and those subject to shorter rest intervals. Participants’ peak oxygen uptake also improved (SMD = 0.81). Concerning lipid metabolism, participants’ total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides decreased significantly, particularly in females, younger and obese individuals, and those who trained more than twice per week. High-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly only in females and those involved in frequent training. In regard to glucose metabolism, participants’ fasting insulin declined (SMD = −0.47), especially in regard to programs exceeding 12 weeks, whereas no significant changes were observed in fasting blood glucose, glycated hemoglobin, or the homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance. According to the GRADE assessments, the certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate across these outcomes. Conclusions: Recreational football improves the body composition and cardiometabolic health in overweight or obese individuals, resulting in reductions in adiposity, blood pressure, lipids, and insulin, with greater benefits observed in females, younger individuals, and those engaging in more frequent training. These findings support its potential as a practical intervention for weight and cardiometabolic risk management, in both clinical and community settings.

This study systematically examined the effects of Tai Chi exercise on bone health in menopausal women, with subgroup analyses of potential moderators. A systematic search was conducted across nine databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EBSCO-Medline, EBSCO-Sportdiscus, Embase, CNKI, VIP and Wanfang Data) on June 1 and updated on 14 September 2025 to identify controlled trials evaluating perimenopausal or postmenopausal women. A three-level meta-analysis was performed to pool effect estimates, reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs), with heterogeneity further explored through subgroup analyses. Across 16 studies involving 1091 participants aged 49–64 years, Tai Chi interventions led to significant improvements in bone health. Training protocols ranged from 6 to 104 weeks, with sessions lasting 30 to 90 min. Bone mineral density (BMD) improved significantly at the femoral neck (SMD = 0.50), greater trochanter (SMD = 0.61), and lumbar spine L2–L4 (SMD = 0.81), with stronger effects observed in perimenopausal women. Bone mineral content (BMC) also increased significantly in menopausal women (SMD = 1.63, I² = 91.46%), although heterogeneity was substantial, and no significant differences were detected in subgroup moderators. In contrast, no significant effects were found for bone mineral metabolism (p = 0.38) or bone turnover markers (p = 0.25). According to GRADE assessments, the certainty of evidence ranged from low to moderate across these outcomes. In conclusion, while Tai Chi has been shown to improve BMD and BMC in menopausal women, the relatively high heterogeneity observed for BMC necessitates cautious interpretation of these particular outcomes. In contrast, no statistically significant effects were observed on bone mineral metabolism (BMM) and bone turnover markers (BTMs). Notably, given the significant differences observed between perimenopausal and postmenopausal women, future well-designed studies that stratify participants by menopausal status and possess adequate statistical power are needed to further explore the potential differential effects of Tai Chi on bone health.

Background: This systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis evaluated the effects of combined music and caffeine on psychophysiological responses during exercise. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched from database inception to 10 June 2026. Randomized crossover studies comparing caffeine plus music with placebo plus no music, caffeine alone, or music alone were eligible. Outcomes included rating of perceived exertion (RPE), Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES), Feeling Scale (FS), and heart rate (HR). Findings were synthesized descriptively by outcome and comparator, considering study-specific effect estimates, confidence intervals, and experimental conditions. Random-effects meta-analyses were retained as secondary exploratory summaries. Because fewer than 10 independent studies were available, meta-regression and formal assessment of small-study effects were not undertaken. Results: Five crossover studies involving 88 participants were included. Study-specific RPE estimates varied from large reductions to estimates close to the null or in the opposite direction. PACES point estimates favoured the combined intervention, but their magnitudes differed substantially in comparisons with placebo plus no music and caffeine alone. Feeling Scale and heart-rate findings also varied across studies. All four primary meta-analyses showed I² values exceeding 90%, and the certainty of evidence was very low for all primary outcomes. Conclusions: The available evidence comprises five small crossover studies conducted in different populations and experimental settings. Study-specific findings suggest possible improvements in exercise enjoyment, while perceived exertion, affective valence, and heart-rate responses vary across studies. Neither the descriptive findings nor the secondary exploratory pooled estimates establish a stable, broadly applicable magnitude of intervention benefit. Given the very low certainty of evidence, no firm recommendations can be made regarding the use of caffeine combined with music across exercise populations and settings. Further adequately powered studies using clearly specified interventions and comparable outcome assessments are needed to determine which responses are reproducible and practically meaningful.

Background: Caffeine–taurine combinations are widely used in commercial sports products. Whether this combination improves exercise performance is still unclear. This study aimed to estimate the effect of caffeine–taurine co-supplementation versus placebo on exercise performance. Methods: Randomized controlled trials comparing caffeine plus taurine versus placebo were searched in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and related databases up to June 1, 2026. Outcomes included heart rate (HR), reaction time (RT), time to exhaustion (TTE), rating of perceived exertion (RPE), and peak/maximal anaerobic power (PP). A random-effects model was applied. Risk of bias was assessed with RoB 2.0. Results: A total of 11 randomized controlled trials involving 234 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, caffeine–taurine co-supplementation was associated with improvements in time to exhaustion (SMD = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.03 to 1.05) and PP (SMD = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.89); an expanded secondary product-level analysis that additionally included one commercial multi-ingredient energy drink yielded a smaller estimate (SMD = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.78) that cannot be attributed specifically to caffeine and taurine. The pooled estimate for reaction time favored supplementation (SMD = −1.49, 95% CI: −2.78 to −0.20), but very high heterogeneity and a prediction interval crossing the null indicated that the effect was not consistent across settings, whereas no meaningful effect was observed for heart rate (WMD = −0.11, 95% CI: −5.76 to 5.53). Rating of perceived exertion was significantly reduced (SMD = −0.44, 95% CI: −0.83 to −0.04). Conclusions: Caffeine–taurine-only formulations were associated with possible benefits for selected performance outcomes, including PP. However, the evidence was derived from few, generally small studies and did not establish the independent contribution of caffeine, taurine, or their interaction. Results from commercial multi-ingredient products should be interpreted at the product level rather than as evidence of an isolated caffeine–taurine effect.

Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the comparative effects of unilateral versus bilateral training on physical performance outcomes relevant to team sport athletes. The review addresses strength, power, speed, agility, reactive strength, and core stability rather than direct match performance or sport-specific skill execution. Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, nine electronic databases were searched from inception through 10 August 2025, for randomized controlled trials directly comparing unilateral and bilateral training. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool, and certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Results: Twenty studies involving 539 unique participants were included. Compared with bilateral training, unilateral training showed potential advantages for agility (standardized mean difference [SMD] = −0.73), sprint performance (SMD = −0.30), and muscular strength (SMD = 0.29). However, effect magnitude and certainty varied across outcomes, and several analyses showed substantial heterogeneity or limited certainty. The primary vertical-jump estimate favored unilateral training (SMD = 0.38), but the association was no longer statistically significant after trim-and-fill adjustment. Moderator analyses were exploratory and should not be interpreted as confirming optimal training parameters. In the one-effect-per-sample sensitivity analysis, the vertical-jump and muscular-strength estimates were no longer statistically significant, whereas excluding the two acute crossover studies did not change any affected outcome conclusion. Conclusions: Unilateral training may be used as a complementary strategy for selected physical performance qualities relevant to team sport participation, particularly agility and sprint performance. These findings remain preliminary because of heterogeneity, potential publication bias, methodological limitations, and moderate-to-very-low GRADE certainty. The evidence does not justify replacing bilateral training or prescribing a specific unilateral program across sports.

The perimenopausal phase represents a critical window for early intervention against accelerated bone loss, highlighting an urgent need for safe and accessible non-pharmacological strategies. Although mind–body exercises are widely recommended for healthy aging, their specific structural and metabolic impacts on the perimenopausal skeleton yield conflicting results and remain poorly understood. To address this gap, this systematic review and three-level meta-analysis evaluated the effects of mind–body modalities on bone health in perimenopausal women, utilizing this model to account for statistical dependencies among multiple effect sizes within individual studies. Quantitative synthesis suggested that mind–body exercise may offer modest structural benefits, indicated by positive effects on bone mineral density (SMD = 0.55, p < 0.01) and bone mineral content (SMD = 1.63, p < 0.01); however, these findings must be interpreted with caution as the accompanying certainty of evidence is low to very low. Conversely, these structural adaptations were not accompanied by stable alterations in bone turnover markers, which remained consistently unchanged (SMD = −0.10, p > 0.05). Furthermore, bone mineral metabolism was not statistically significant in the primary analysis, with a confidence interval that included the null (SMD = 0.90, p = 0.079) and demonstrated limited stability across robustness checks. Assessed via the GRADE framework, this overall very low certainty was primarily due to risk-of-bias concerns, inconsistency, imprecision, suspected publication bias, and clinical heterogeneity. Consequently, given the current evidence limitations, mind–body exercise is best conceptualized as a supportive lifestyle component of a healthy aging trajectory rather than a potent osteogenic therapy. It offers a holistic preventative approach that might support bone health while concurrently supporting overall musculoskeletal resilience, though firm clinical recommendations cannot yet be made. Future well-powered trials must adopt rigorous designs with precise endocrine staging to better clarify the underlying mechanisms of skeletal adaptation.