Chen et al. [20] RCT Shanghai, China (Chinese) 40 female and older adults, aged 55 to 65 TC (20/20): 55 to 65 min, 3 to 4 times weekly for 20 weeks (Yang-style)

CG: sedentary lifestyle Calcaneus ultrasound BMD (BQI, BUA, and SOS)

Biomarkers (ALP) Mean change (Sig) for TC vs. CG: BQI (−3.53 vs. −8.32), SOS (−14.11 vs. −15.57), and BUA (−1.58 vs. −9.21).

Mean change (Sig) for TC vs. CG:ALP (−13 vs. −12.69)

Chan et al. [35] RCT Hongkong, China (English) 132 postmenopausal women (54.0 ± 3.5 years) TC (67/54): five 50-min sessions weekly for 12 months (Yang style)

CG (65/54): sedentary lifestyle BMD (Lumbar spine – L2-4, proximal femur [neck and trochanter], and ultral distal tibia [tBMD, iBMD, CTD]) TC vs. CG ( NS ): lumbar spine (0.10 vs. −0.89%), proximal femur neck (−0.94 vs. −1.80%), proximal femur trochanter (−1.19 vs. −0.56%), tBMD (−0.53 vs. −1.46), iBMD (−0.61 vs. −1.58), and CTD (−0.39 vs. −1.40).

Du et al. [27] RCT Shanxi, China (Chinese) 30 perimenopausal women, aged 45 to 55 TCSB (15/15): 90 min, 4 to 5 times weekly for 24 weeks.

CG: original lifestyle BMD (Total body, lumbar spine [L1-4], and trunk)

Biomarker (ALP) Mean BMD change (Sig) for TC vs. CG: lumbar spine (0.03 vs. −0.003), total body (0.01 vs. −0.02), and trunk (0 vs. −0.05)

Mean change for TC vs. CG: ALP (−1.1 vs. 0.2)

Hui et al. [36] RCT Hongkong, China (English) 253 middle-aged participants (45.8 ± 5.3 years) TC (129/129): five 45-min sessions weekly for 12 weeks (Yang-style)

CT (124/124): original lifestyle BMC (total body) Mean BMD change (NS) for TC and CG: total body (−0.39 vs. −0.33)

Mao [42] RCT Shangxi, China (Chinese) 80 postmenopausal women (56.78 ± 2.91 years) TC (20/20) and TCS (20/20): 45 to 50 min, 7 times weekly for 20 weeks.

CS (20/20): standard care (calcium supplement)

CG (20/20): original lifestyle BMD (Lumbar spine [L2-4]) TC vs. CG and TCCS vs. CS (Sig): Lumbar spine (1.361 vs. −0.874) and (2.036 vs. 0.378), respectively.

Peppone et al. [26] RCT USA (English) 16 breast cancer survivors, median age of 53 years TC (7/7): three 60-min sessions weekly for 12 weeks (Yang-style)

CG (9/9): standard care Biomarkers (NTx, BAP, and BRI) BAP (NS): TC (8.3 to 10.2; 22.4%) vs. ST (7.6 to 8.1; 6.3%).

NTx (Sig): TC (17.6 to 11.1; −36.6%) vs. ST (20.8 to 18.8; –9.6%)

BRI (Sig, p = 0.05): TC (1.6) vs. ST (0.23)

Shen et al. [21] RCT Texas, USA (English) 28 sedentary, older adults.

TC (78.8 ± 1.3)

RT (79.4 ± 2.2) TC (14/14) three 40-min sessions weekly for 24 weeks (Yang-style)

RT (14/14): three 40-min sessions weekly for 24 weeks (bench press, leg press, leg curl, leg extension, and seated row on a resistance exercise machine, as well as shoulder press and arm curl) Biomarkers (BAP, PYD, PTH, and BAP/PYD ratio), but mean score and standard deviation were not reported. After 6 weeks, both TC and RT exhibited higher level of serum BAP, as compared to the baseline and the TC group exhibited a greater increase in serum BAP than the RT group.

BAP/PYD ratio was higher than baseline only in the TC group, and the increase of the ratio in the TC was greater than that in the RT group.

Shen et al [37] RCT Texas, USA (English) 171 postmenopausal women

TC + placebo (58.3 ± 7.7);

TC + GTP (57.6 ± 6.7); GTP (56.5 ± 5.5);

Placebo (57.6 ± 7.5) Placebo + TC (42/37): medicinal starch 500 mg daily and 24-move simplified Yang-style TC training (three 60-min sessions weekly for 24 weeks.

TC + GPT (38/37): same as TC group + GTP 500 mg daily.

GPT (47/39): GTP 500 mg daily

Placebo (44/37): same as medicinal starch 500 mg daily. Biomarker (ALP). No significant change in the ALP was observed

Shen et al. [38] RCT Texas, USA (English) Same as Shen et al. [37] Same as Shen et al. [37]

Yang-style Biomarkers (BAP and TRAP) A significant main effect of TC on serum BAP at 3 months ( p = 0.04). No significant main effect of TC on TRAP was found.

Song [43] RCT Jiangsu, China (Chinese) 40 people with osteoporosis.

TC (62.67 ± 11.23)

CG (63.81 ± 13.07) TC (20/20): six 60-min sessions weekly (yang-style, but not report the length of intervention) + standard care

CG (20/20): standard care BMD (lumbar spine [L2-4] and femoral neck)

Biomarkers (BGP and ALP) Mean change (Sig) for TC and CG: lumbar spine (0.205 vs. 0.003) and femoral neck (0.228 vs. 0.005).

Mean change (Sig) for TC and CG: and BGP (−2.04 vs. −0.61) and ALP (−17.31 vs. −11.58)

Song et al. [24] RCT South Korea (English) 82 women with osteoarthritis

TC (mean age = 63 years)

CG (mean age = 61 years) TC (41/30): 60 to 65 min, 7 times weekly for six months (Sun style)

CG (41/35): 60-min self-help education session, once monthly for six months BMD (DXA): Femoral neck and trochanter. Mean change (Sig) for TC vs. CG:

Femur neck (0.09 vs. −0.10), (0.04 vs. −0.04), and trochanter (0.07 vs. −0.05).

Song et al. [22] RCT Henan, China (English) 105 community living elderly women, aged 55 to 65. TC (35/31): Chen Style

CG1 (35/33): Dance

CG2 (35/30): Walking

six 40-min sessions weekly for 12 months in three selected groups BMD (BQI) Mean Change (Sig) for TC vs. CG1 vs. CG2: BQI (10.51 vs. 7.65 vs. 7.69)

Sufinowicz et al. [23] RCT Poland (English) 90 men aged over 60 (68.83 ± 5.84 years) TC (35/35): 45-min, twice per week for four months CG

(55/55): original lifestyle Biomarkers (OSC and CTX) Mean change (Sig) for TC vs. CG: CTX (−0.31 vs. −0.065) and OSC (−0.949 vs. −0.751)

Wang et al. [39] RCT Shanghai, China (English) 119 postmenopausal women, aged 52 to 65 TC (40/34): four 60-min sessions weekly for 12 months

TCRT (40/37): four 60-min sessions weekly for 12 months

CG (39/35): original lifestyle BMD (lumbar spine [L2-4] and femoral neck) Mean change (Sig) for TCRT vs. TC vs. CG: Lumbar spine (0.0182 vs. 0.0105 vs. −0.0038), femur neck (0.0004 vs. 0.0045 vs. −0.03), and (−0.0047 vs. −0.0171 vs. −0.0397)

Wayne et al. [40] RCT Boston, MA, USA (English) 86 post-menopausal osteopenic women, aged 45 to 70 TC (43/42): 99.5 h during 9-month intervention plus standard care. Of the TC group, 26 completed 75% training requirements or above as TCAG

CG (43/42): standard care (daily calcium, vitamin D, and regular exercise) BMD (femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine [L1-4]).

Biomarkers (CTX and OSC) Femoral neck BMD: Significant positive change (+0.04%) was only observed in TCAG compared to the baseline, whereas CG group experienced a loss (−0.98%) ( p = 0.05)

Biomarker: significant positive change (−5.1%) in OSC was only observed in TCAG group ( p = 0.03) compared to the baseline.

Woo et al. [41] RCT Hongkong, China (English) 120 community-living elderly people, aged 65 to 74 TC (60/58): Three sessions weekly for 12 months

CG (60/59): original lifestyle BMD (the total hip and spine [L1-4]) For female participants, TC vs. CG: total hip (Sig) (0.07 vs. −2.25%), spine (NS) (0.10 vs. 0.98%)

For female participants, TC vs. CG: total hip (NS) (−0.48 vs. −0.15%), and spine (1.35 vs. 0.54%)

Zhou [44] RCT Shangxi, China (Chinese) 48 postmenopausal women (55.94 ± 2.83 years) TCPH (12/12), Fan dancing (12/12), and walking (12/12): 45 to 60 min, 5 to 7 times weekly for 10 months.

CG (12/12): original lifestyle BMD (Lumbar spine [L2-4] Lumbar spine (Sig) for TC vs. CG: (3.4 vs. −1.83%) and for TCPH vs. CG (1.84 vs. −1.83%)

Zhou [45] RCT Shanxi, China (Chinese) 60 postmenopausal women, aged 55.9 TC (12/12), TCPH (12/12), rope jumping (12/12), Mulan boxing (12/12): Five-to-seven sessions (45 to 60 min) for 10 months (Yang Style).

CG (12/12): original lifestyle BMD (Lumbar spine [L2-4], distal radius and ulna of wrist) Mean change (Sig) for TCPH vs. CG: lumbar spine (0.035 vs. −0.019), distal radius (0.031 vs. −0.017), and distal ulna (0.033 vs. −0.016).

Mean change (Sig) for TC vs. CG: lumbar spine (0.019 vs. −0.019), distal radius (0.017 vs. −0.017), and distal ulna (0.016 vs. −0.016)

Zhou et al. [46] RCT Shan Xi, China, (Chinese) 64 postmenopausal women, with a mean age of 57.21 ± 3.41 TCPH (16/16): 45 to 60 min, 5 to 7 times weekly for 6 months.

CS (16/16): calcium carbonate 750 mg + calcium, 300 mg + Vitamin D, 100 IU, 1 tablet, 2 times daily for 6 months.

TCPH + CSG: same as above

CG: original lifestyle BMD (Lumbar spine [L2-4] TCPH + CSG vs. CSG: lumbar spine (Sig) (2.037 vs. 0.378%)

TCPH vs. CG: lumbar spine (NS) (1.361 vs. −0.874%)