Background: Μetabolic syndrome (MetS)—comprises central adiposity, elevated blood pressure, dyslipidaemia, and dysglycaemia, increasing the risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Exercise training improves cardiorespiratory fitness and several MetS components, but real-world effectiveness is limited by poor adherence, restricted supervision, and insufficient personalisation. Objective: This scoping review mapped the clinical intervention evidence on technology-enhanced exercise and structured physical activity relevant to MetS, while distinguishing direct MetS evidence from translational evidence. Methods: In accordance with PRISMA-ScR, we searched PubMed and extended the search to Scopus and Web of Science; a supplementary IEEE Xplore search and a post hoc Embase check were also conducted. Eligible studies were interventions using web-based delivery, wearables, telemonitoring/mobile health (mHealth), artificial intelligence (AI) coaching, virtual reality (VR)/exergaming, or continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) alongside exercise training or structured physical activity. Results: Nineteen studies met the eligibility criteria. The evidence base was weighted toward wearable/app-based feedback and telemonitoring/mHealth/web-based approaches, with fewer studies on VR/exergaming, CGM-enabled exercise, and AI coaching. Most studies were randomised or cluster-randomised, but interventions were usually short term. Across categories, technology most consistently supported adherence, self-monitoring, accountability, remote supervision, and, in selected cases, physiology-informed personalisation. Direct MetS evidence was strongest for wearables with structured feedback, telemonitoring, mHealth, and web-based delivery, whereas AI coaching and CGM were supported by adjacent translational evidence. Conclusions: Technology-enhanced exercise and structured physical activity show promising but heterogeneous and still preliminary potential for MetS management. Key limitations include short follow-up, uneven representation across categories, inconsistent reporting of exercise dose/intensity fidelity and adverse events, and limited equity and implementation outcomes.
Kouidis et al. (Tue,) studied this question.