This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Protocol, extracted data and analysis code of a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing heart rate variability (HRV)-guided with predefined training in controlled trials, pooling the means and the variances of change in performance and maximal oxygen uptake (standardized mean difference, log variability ratio, log coefficient-of-variation ratio) and fitting a Bayesian variance-components model of individual response. Status of the protocol. The review was not prospectively registered, and no protocol was finalized before study selection. The protocol in this record describes the methods as conducted and lists the methodological decisions taken during the review, with their rationale. It was deposited after completion of the analyses and does not constitute a prospective registration. Files. E9_protocol_retrospective.pdf (protocol); E9_DataS1_extracted_data.xlsx (eligibility decisions, study characteristics, arm-level extracted data with source locations, effect sizes and all analysis outputs); E9_analysis_code.zip (Python and R code, Stan model, intermediate data and outputs; run order in README.txt).
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tornero-Aguilera et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: