What does this research mean for the field?

Recreational athletes, particularly younger males, perceive higher frequencies and intensities of exercise as more harmful to cardiovascular health, with one-third expressing worry about potential cardiac risks driven primarily by media reports and family history. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.NOVEL_FINDING. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

What question did this study set out to answer?

This study aims to explore recreational athletes' perceptions of cardiovascular risks associated with high-volume, high-intensity exercise.

June 12, 2026European Journal of Preventive CardiologyOpen Access

Higher exercise frequencies and intensities were perceived as more harmful for cardiovascular health, with perceived risk of high-intensity exercise increasing from 6% at 1 session/week to 30% at ≥4 sessions/week (P<0.001).

Q: What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Cross-Sectional. Population: Recreational athletes (n=2881). Intervention: High-intensity exercise frequency vs. Lower exercise frequency. Primary outcome: Perceived cardiovascular risk of high-intensity exercise (p=<0.001).

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Population

2,881 recreational athletes ≥18 years old, mean age 54±15, 43% female. 66% were healthy, 26% had CV risk…

Design

Cross-sectional

Key result

Higher exercise frequencies and intensities were perceived as more harmful for cardiovascular health, with perceived risk of high-intensity exercise increasing from 6% at 1 session/week to 30% at ≥4 sessions/week (P<0.001).

Authors

KNK A M Van Den Nobelen CVC Q M Vaessen JJJ D Jongerius

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

May deter high-volume training adherence; extends extreme exercise hypothesis research to perceptual influences.

Key Points

This study aims to explore recreational athletes' perceptions of cardiovascular risks associated with high-volume, high-intensity exercise.
Participants included 2,881 recreational athletes aged ≥18 years.
An online questionnaire assessed exercise behavior, cardiovascular health perceptions, and risks using Likert scale responses.
Statistical analyses, including logistic regression and McNemar test, were utilized to compare responses.
66% of participants perceived risks increased with higher training frequencies; 2-6% expressed harm from moderate exercise and 6-30% for high-intensity depending on sessions.
Younger male athletes notably reported higher perceived risks for cardiovascular health at ≥4 high-intensity sessions (ORadjusted: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.29-2.01; p<0.001).
34% of athletes worried about heart health risks, mainly linked to media reports and personal experiences with cardiac events.

Study Design

Type

Cross-Sectional (n=2,881)

Structured PICO

Population

2,881 recreational athletes (mean age 54, 43% female) completed an online questionnaire assessing their perception of the risks and benefits of exercise on cardiovascular health.

Outcome

Athlete's perception towards the risks and benefits of exercise on CV healthpatient reported

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 30% vs 6%

p-value: p=<0.001

One in three recreational athletes worries about potential cardiac health risks of exercise, leading 7% to reduce their exercise intensity or frequency.

Cite This Study

Nobelen et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Recreational athletes (n=2,881). High-intensity exercise frequency vs. Lower exercise frequency was evaluated on Perceived cardiovascular risk of high-intensity exercise (p=<0.001). Higher exercise frequencies and intensities were perceived as more harmful for cardiovascular health, with perceived risk of high-intensity exercise increasing from 6% at 1 session/week to 30% at ≥4 sessions/week (P<0.001).

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a2bd1386550ea4541ffe970 https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjpc/zwag249.154

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

June 12, 2026European Journal of Preventive CardiologyOpen Access

Higher exercise frequencies and intensities were perceived as more harmful for cardiovascular health, with perceived risk of high-intensity exercise increasing from 6% at 1 session/week to 30% at ≥4 sessions/week (P<0.001).

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Population

2,881 recreational athletes ≥18 years old, mean age 54±15, 43% female. 66% were healthy, 26% had CV risk…

Design

Cross-sectional

Key result

Authors

KNK A M Van Den Nobelen CVC Q M Vaessen JJJ D Jongerius

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

May deter high-volume training adherence; extends extreme exercise hypothesis research to perceptual influences.

Key Points

This study aims to explore recreational athletes' perceptions of cardiovascular risks associated with high-volume, high-intensity exercise.
Participants included 2,881 recreational athletes aged ≥18 years.
An online questionnaire assessed exercise behavior, cardiovascular health perceptions, and risks using Likert scale responses.
Statistical analyses, including logistic regression and McNemar test, were utilized to compare responses.
66% of participants perceived risks increased with higher training frequencies; 2-6% expressed harm from moderate exercise and 6-30% for high-intensity depending on sessions.
Younger male athletes notably reported higher perceived risks for cardiovascular health at ≥4 high-intensity sessions (ORadjusted: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.29-2.01; p<0.001).
34% of athletes worried about heart health risks, mainly linked to media reports and personal experiences with cardiac events.

Study Design

Type

Cross-Sectional (n=2,881)

Structured PICO

Population

2,881 recreational athletes (mean age 54, 43% female) completed an online questionnaire assessing their perception of the risks and benefits of exercise on cardiovascular health.

Outcome

Athlete's perception towards the risks and benefits of exercise on CV healthpatient reported

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 30% vs 6%

p-value: p=<0.001

One in three recreational athletes worries about potential cardiac health risks of exercise, leading 7% to reduce their exercise intensity or frequency.

Cite This Study

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a2bd1386550ea4541ffe970 https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjpc/zwag249.154

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark