Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20057999›Full record

Trial reportOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2010

Comparison of the effects of two resistance training regimens on muscular and bone responses in premenopausal women.

A C Vanni, F Meyer, A D R da Veiga, V P S Zanardo

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Does frequency of resistance training affect tibial cortical bone density in older women? A randomized controlled trial.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2013
    Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

A C VanniHealth Sciences Department, Universidade Regional Integrada do Alto Uruguai e das Missões-Campus de Erechim, Rua: João Risson, 61, Bairro José Bonifácio, Erechim, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil CEP 99700-000. adrideboni@yahoo.com.br
F Meyer
A D R da Veiga
V P S Zanardo
Universidade Regional Integrada do Alto Uruguai e das Missões · BRUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

summaryA 28-week resistance training with linear periodization was compared with an undulating model in 27 premenopausal women. In both groups, bone mineral density (BMD) was not changed but muscle strength increased, and there were changes in anthropometrical and muscle damage parameters, indicating that in this population, these models are similar concerning these variables.

introductionThis study seeks to compare the effects of resistance training with undulating versus linear periodization on BMD, muscle strength, anthropometrical variables, and muscle damage parameters in premenopausal women.

methodsTwenty-seven females (39.6 +/- 0.41 years, mean +/- standard error), without osteopenia or osteoporosis and without calcium supplementation, were randomly assigned either to a linear periodization group (LPG, n = 14) or to an undulating periodization group (UPG, n = 13). The subjects were trained three times a week for 28 weeks. Lumbar spine and femoral neck BMDs were measured through dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Maximal and submaximal dynamic muscle strengths were measured through the 1-RM and 20-RM tests, respectively. Anthropometrical (body mass, skinfolds, and perimeters) and muscle damage parameters were assessed through serum creatine kinase (CK) and delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS).

resultsBMD remained unchanged in both groups, despite significant increases in maximal (LPG, 37-73%; UPG, 40-70%) and submaximal (LPG, 82-114%; UPG, 70-102%) muscle strength. The perimeter of the distal thigh was increased (about 1.7 cm) in both groups. CK and DOMS were greater in the first mesocycle than in the subsequent ones. After the 1st training session in each mesocycle, 24 and 48 h CK was increased as compared to pretraining values.

conclusionsThe resistance training of 28 weeks increased muscle strength in both training groups with no difference in BMD or in the occurrence of muscle damage.

Indexed as

Absorptiometry, PhotonAdultAnthropometryBone DensityCreatine KinaseFemaleFemur NeckHumansLumbar VertebraeMuscle, SkeletalMuscle StrengthPremenopauseResistance TrainingCreatine Kinase

Identifiers

PMID20057999
OpenAlexW2036657084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.