Stretching Dose (Intensity, Duration, Frequency): What the Sources Studied
Meta-analyses and trials of how much stretching was done, at what intensity, for how long and how often, with range of motion as the outcome. The sources' conclusions are not yet recorded in this library, so this entry states no dose-response.
None, informational content.
- Persistent joint pain or sudden loss of range of motion, refer to a physician or physical therapist.
What the evidence says
The sources on this entry studied stretching dose: intensity, hold duration, total exposure and frequency, with range of motion as the outcome. Ingram 2024 is a systematic review and meta-analysis of 189 studies and 6654 participants, and Ingram 2025 is a systematic review and meta-analysis of 65 studies and 1542 participants; the two share a first author. Cipriani 2012, Sato 2020 and Nakamura 2020 are randomised trials, Kamada 2016 and Freitas 2015 are non-randomised trials, and Takeuchi 2021 is a trial whose design this library has not yet resolved. The sources' conclusions are not yet recorded in this library, so this entry states no dose-response: no relationship between stretching intensity, duration or frequency and range of motion is stated here.
- Doubling hold time doubles gains, returns diminish.
- One long stretch permanently maximizes flexibility.
- Agreement
- Direction recorded for 0 of 8 sources; not yet recorded for the rest.
- The claim's outcome
- Outcome not yet recorded
- Certainty
- No source states a certainty rating.
- Authors
- Sources share authors: Lewis Ingram (first author of 2 sources); H. Bennett (senior author of 2 sources); M. Nakamura (senior author of 2 sources).
What each source measured and concluded (8)
- How it was read
- read in full text
- How it was read
- read in full text
- How it was read
- read in full text
- What the review says it includes
- meta-analysis, systematic review
- Studies and participants, as stated
- N = 6654 participants across 189 studies
- How it was read
- read in full text
- What the review says it includes
- meta-analysis, systematic review
- Studies and participants, as stated
- N = 1542 participants across 65 studies
- How it was read
- read in full text
- How it was read
- read in full text
- How it was read
- read in full text
- How it was read
- read in full text
Every source below is shown with its study design and links to the original study. This is the audit trail.