Meta-analysis of the intervention effects of tai chi on fasting blood glucose, blood pressure and triglyceride in middle-aged and elderly people

Figures & data

Figure 1. PRISMA 2020 flow chart. This is a PRISMA 2020 flow chart. A total of 3160 articles were initially retrieved, of which 1729 were BP, 624 were FBG and 807 were TG. After screening, a total of 68 articles, including 30 BP, 18 FBG and 20 TG, were finally included in the meta-analysis.

Table 1. Basic characteristics of included articles.

The first author (Published year)	Number of research subjects	Gender	Whether the indicators is abnormal	Period	Frequency (times/per week)	Single duration/min	style	Extraction Indicators
Zhao (2015)	16	Male	yes	12	7	60 min	Chen	①
Kim (2013)	20	Female	yes	12	5	60 min	conventional	①
Wu (2021)a	18	Male	yes	16	5	60 min	Yang	①
Wu (2021)b	18	Male	yes	16	5	60 min	Yang	①
Wu (2021)c	18	Male	yes	16	5	60 min	Yang	①
Wu (2021)d	16	Female	yes	16	5	60 min	Yang	①
Wu (2021)e	16	Female	yes	16	5	60 min	Yang	①
Wu (2021)f	16	Female	yes	16	5	60 min	Yang	①
Leung (2019)	35	Unrestricted	yes	12	2	60 min	Yang	①②③
Cho (2022)	60	Female	no	24	2	60 min	conventional	①
Ahn (2012)	39	Unrestricted	yes	12	2	60 min	conventional	①
Hui (2015)	253	Unrestricted	no	12	5	30 min	Yang	①
Lan (2008)	53	Unrestricted	yes	48	3	60 min	Yang	①
Sun (2015)	266	Unrestricted	yes	48	3	60 min	conventional	①②③
Zhao (2017)	16	Male	yes	16	3	60 min	Chen	①
Yan (2006)	32	Unrestricted	no	48	5	30 min	Yang	①
Zhou (2020)	93	Unrestricted	yes	8	6	30 min	Yang	①
Zhang (2016)a	20	Unrestricted	yes	12	5	50 min	Yang	①④
Zhang (2016)b	20	Unrestricted	yes	12	5	50 min	Yang	①④
Zhang (2016)c	20	Unrestricted	yes	12	5	50 min	Yang	①④
Li (2015)	100	Male	yes	24	7	50 min	Chen	①②③④
Wang (2019)	100	Unrestricted	no	12	3	60 min	Yang	①②③
Zhang (2015)	100	Unrestricted	yes	4	7	30 min	conventional	①
Xiao (2018)	84	Unrestricted	no	12	5	50 min	Yang	①②③
Yin (2020)	88	Unrestricted	yes	12	5	60 min	Chen	①
Lee (2004)	28	Unrestricted	yes	6	2	60 min	Yang	②③
Kim (2016)	40	Female	yes	24	3	50 min	Yang	②③
Kim (2014)	24	Female	yes	12	3	120 min	Yang	②③
Nguyen (2012)	73	Unrestricted	yes	24	2	60 min	conventional	②③
Lee (2017)	68	Unrestricted	yes	6	5	60 min	Yang	②③
Shi (2014)	21	Unrestricted	yes	12	5	30 min	Yang	②③④
Tsai (2003)	76	Unrestricted	yes	12	3	50 min	Yang	②③④
Lam (2008)	53	Unrestricted	yes	24	2	60 min	Yang	②③
Wang (2022)	22	Male	no	24	5	60 min	Chen	②③④
Nosrat-abad (2021)a	30	Male	yes	8	3	50 min	Yang	②③
Nosrat-abad (2021)b	30	Female	yes	8	3	50 min	Yang	②③
Song (2009)	60	Female	no	24	2	60 min	Yang	②
Hsu (2015)	100	Female	yes	12	3	60 min	Yang	②③
Wang (2022)-	73	Female	no	24	3	60 min	Yang	②③
Rosado-Perez (2013)	54	Unrestricted	no	24	7	60 min	Yang	②③
Lo (2012)	58	Unrestricted	yes	8	3	60 min	conventional	②③
Wang (2011)	60	Unrestricted	yes	16	5	60 min	conventional	②③
Shou (2018)	198	Unrestricted	yes	12	7	60 min	Yang	②③
Axian (2019)	49	Unrestricted	yes	16	3	40 min	Yang	②③
Yao (2016)	50	Male	no	24	5	60 min	Yang	②③
Shun (2014)	80	Unrestricted	yes	8	7	120 min	Yang	②③
Wu (2017)	108	Unrestricted	yes	24	5	60 min	Yang	②③
Chen (2013)	68	Unrestricted	yes	12	6	30 min	Yang	②③④
Liu (2010)	20	Unrestricted	no	8	4	40 min	Yang	②③
Mao (2006)	62	Unrestricted	yes	8	6	60 min	Yang	②③
Zhang (2017)	73	Unrestricted	yes	12	3	60 min	Yang	②③④
Lu (2015)	25	Unrestricted	yes	16	6	60 min	Yang	④
Chen (2013)-	60	Unrestricted	yes	12	4	60 min	Yang	④
Ding (2006)	60	Unrestricted	yes	20	5	50 min	Yang	④
Shen (2018)	38	Unrestricted	yes	24	6	60 min	Yang	④
Jiang (2007)	36	Unrestricted	yes	20	7	60 min	Yang	④
Mao (2007)	80	Female	yes	48	3	60 min	Yang	④
Yang (2021)	94	Unrestricted	yes	16	6	60 min	Yang	④
Ma (2019)	30	Unrestricted	no	12	3	60 min	Yang	④
Hu (2022)	20	Unrestricted	yes	12	7	60 min	conventional	④
Yang (2020)	60	Unrestricted	yes	24	5	60 min	Yang	④
Chen (2021)	52	Unrestricted	yes	16	3	60 min	Yang	④
Sha (2007)	40	Unrestricted	no	72	5,7	60–120 min	Yang	④
Cui (2019)a	60	Unrestricted	no	24	3	60 min	Yang	④
Cui (2019)b	60	Unrestricted	no	24	3	60 min	Yang	④
Chen (2022)	46	Unrestricted	no	16	5	60 min	Yang	④

Extraction Indicators: ①: SBP; ②: DBP; ③: FBG; ④: TG.

Figure 2. Results of the risk of bias. Judgments about each risk of bias item presented across all included trials.

Figure 3. Results of the risk of bias. Judgments about each risk of bias item for each included trail.

Table 2. Quantitative synthesis of main effects.

Indicators	Number of articles	Number of research subjects	ES	95%CI		Heterogeneity test
				lower limit	upper limit	I^2	p
SBP	31	2163	−0.764	−1.046	−0.482	89.385	<.001
DBP	30	2073	−0.426	−0.679	−0.172	86.965	<.001
FBG	25	1517	−0.552	−0.896	−0.209	89.250	<.001
TG	23	1113	−0.452	−0.699	−0.204	74.966	<.001

Figure 4. Forest plot of the sensitivity analysis of SBP. This is a Forest plot of the sensitivity analysis of SBP. Forest plots for all indicators show that the effect values were not significantly different from the main effects after the removal of any items.

Figure 5. Forest plot of the sensitivity analysis of DBP. This is a Forest plot of the sensitivity analysis of DBP. Forest plots for all indicators show that the effect values were not significantly different from the main effects after the removal of any items.

Figure 6. Forest plot of the sensitivity analysis of FBG. This is a Forest plot of the sensitivity analysis of FBG. Forest plots for all indicators show that the effect values were not significantly different from the main effects after the removal of any items.

Figure 7. Forest plot of the sensitivity analysis of TG. This is a Forest plot of the sensitivity analysis of TG. Forest plots for all indicators show that the effect values were not significantly different from the main effects after the removal of any items.

Table 3. Results of the sensitivity analysis.

Indicators	ES	%95CI	ES interval after exclusion one by one
SBP	−0.764	[−1.046, −0.482]	[−0.829, −0.696]
DBP	−0.426	[−0.679, −0.172]	[−0.483, −0.344]
FBG	−0.552	[−0.896, −0.209]	[−0.688, −0.483]
TG	−0.452	[−0.699, −0.204]	[−0.493, −0.354]

Figure 8. Funnel plot. (A) Funnel plot of SBP. (B) Funnel plot of DBP. (C) Funnel plot of FBG. (D) Funnel plot of TG. This is a Funnel plot. The funnel plots for all indicators show good symmetry.

Table 4. Subgroup analysis of SBP.

Moderator variable	Subgroup	Number of articles	Moderator effect	ES	Two-tailed test
			p		Z	p
Gender	Male	4	.902	−0.87	−4.82	<.001
	Female	6		−0.71	−1.81	.07
	Male and Female	21		−0.76	−4.36	<.001
whether the indicators is abnormal	Yes	24	.139	−0.84	−4.50	<.001
	No	7		−0.49	−3.54	<.001
Period	4–8 week	8	.982	−0.72	−4.61	<.001
	9–16 week	12		−0.76	−2.73	<.001
	16+ week	11		−0.78	−3.13	.002
Frequency (times/per week)	2–3 times	17	.693	−0.78	−3.30	<.001
	4–5 times	8		−0.68	−2.46	.014
	6–7 times	6		−0.90	−9.82	<.001
Single duration/min	30–50 min	10	.001	−1.38	−6.01	<.001
	60–120 min	21		−0.49	−3.13	.002
style	Yang	25	.311	−0.73	−4.21	<.001
	Chen	2
	conventional	4		−0.88	−2.36	.018

Table 5. DBP subgroup analysis.

Moderator variable	Subgroup	Number of articles	Moderator effect	ES	Two-tailed test
			p		Z	p
Gender	Male	5	.279	−0.71	−3.53	<.001
	Female	4		−0.71	−1.06	.29
	Male and Female	21		−0.33	−2.35	.019
whether the indicators is abnormal	yes	23	.475	−0.48	−3.10	.002
	no	7		−0.26	−1.02	.308
Period	4–8 week	8	.814	−0.29	−1.01	.311
	9–16 week	12		−0.44	−2.07	.038
	16+ week	10		−0.52	−2.31	.021
Frequency (times/per week)	2–3 times	16	0.593	−0.31	−1.50	.133
	4–5 times	8		−0.63	−2.42	.015
	6–7 times	6		−0.51	−356.	<.001
Single duration/min	30–50 min	10	.001	−1.01	−4.65	<.001
	60–120 min	20		−0.14	−1.08	.282
style	Yang	24	.029	−0.50	−3.32	.001
	Chen	2
	conventional	4		0.26	0.78	.435

Table 6. FBG subgroup analysis.

Moderator variable	Subgroup	Number of articles	Moderator effect	ES	Two-tailed test
			p		Z	p
Gender	Male	6	.884	−0.61	−4.12	<.001
	Female	5		−0.60	−2.15	.031
	Male and Female	14		−0.46	−1.79	.074
whether the indicators is abnormal	yes	20	.049	−0.77	−4.92	<.001
	no	5		0.28	0.56	.577
Period	4–8 week	2	.324
	9–16 week	18		−0.47	−1.95	.051
	16+ week	5		−0.55	−2.64	.008
Frequency (times/per week)	2–3 times	7	.231	−0.29	−2.31	.021
	4–5 times	14		−0.58	−1.83	.068
	6–7 times	4		−0.99	−2.35	.019
Single duration/min	30–50 min	9	.636	−0.40	−1.02	.309
	60–120 min	16		−0.60	−4.20	<.001
style	Yang	16	.291	−0.35	−1.43	.152
	Chen	4		−0.99	−2.48	.013
	Conventional	5		−0.85	−2.34	.019

Table 7. TG subgroup analysis.

Moderator variable	Subgroup	Number of articles	Moderator effect	ES	Two-tailed test
			p		Z	p
Gender	Male	2
	Female	1
	Male and Female	20		−0.48	−3.32	.001
whether the indicators is abnormal	yes	17	.076	−0.57	−3.61	<.001
	no	6		−0.15	−0.83	.404
Period	9–16 week	13	.078	−0.25	−1.93	.053
	16+ week	10		−0.71	−3.10	.002
Frequency (times/per week)	2–3 times	7	.215	−2.0	−1.41	.158
	4–5 times	9		−0.57	−2.40	.017
	6–7 times	7		−0.65	−2.22	.027
Single duration/min	30–50 min	7	.007	−0.88	−4.85	<.001
	60–120 min	16		−0.27	−1.95	.052
style	Yang	20		−0.46	−3.20	.001
	Chen	2
	Conventional	1

Data availability statement

We are happy to provide raw data: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ud4ieq71bvelf8b987jl3/DATA.xls?dl=0&rlkey=p7vgdnugiv2km1e671t12prjd