Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27744584›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of applied physiology2016

Resistance training intensity and volume affect changes in rate of force development in resistance-trained men.

Gerald T Mangine, Jay R Hoffman, Ran Wang, Adam M Gonzalez, Jeremy R Townsend, Adam J Wells, Adam R Jajtner, Kyle S Beyer, Carleigh H Boone, Amelia A Miramonti and 4 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of applied physiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

14 authors.

Gerald T MangineExercise Science and Sport Management, Kennesaw State University, 520 Parliament Garden Way NW, Kennesaw, GA, 30144, Georgia. gmangine@kennesaw.edu.
Jay R HoffmanInstitute of Exercise Physiology and Wellness, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
Ran WangInstitute of Exercise Physiology and Wellness, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
Adam M GonzalezDepartment of Health Professions, Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY, USA.
Jeremy R TownsendInstitute of Exercise Physiology and Wellness, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
Adam J WellsInstitute of Exercise Physiology and Wellness, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
Adam R JajtnerInstitute of Exercise Physiology and Wellness, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
Kyle S BeyerInstitute of Exercise Physiology and Wellness, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
Carleigh H BooneInstitute of Exercise Physiology and Wellness, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
Amelia A MiramontiInstitute of Exercise Physiology and Wellness, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
Michael B LaMonicaInstitute of Exercise Physiology and Wellness, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
David H FukudaInstitute of Exercise Physiology and Wellness, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
Nicholas A RatamessHealth and Exercise Science, The College of New Jersey, Ewing, NJ, USA.
Jeffrey R StoutInstitute of Exercise Physiology and Wellness, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare the effects of two different resistance training programs, high intensity (INT) and high volume (VOL), on changes in isometric force (FRC), rate of force development (RFD), and barbell velocity during dynamic strength testing.

methodsTwenty-nine resistance-trained men were randomly assigned to either the INT (n = 15, 3-5 RM, 3-min rest interval) or VOL (n = 14, 10-12 RM, 1-min rest interval) training group for 8 weeks. All participants completed a 2-week preparatory phase prior to randomization. Measures of barbell velocity, FRC, and RFD were performed before (PRE) and following (POST) the 8-week training program. Barbell velocity was determined during one-repetition maximum (1RM) testing of the squat (SQ) and bench press (BP) exercises. The isometric mid-thigh pull was used to assess FRC and RFD at specific time bands ranging from 0 to 30, 50, 90, 100, 150, 200, and 250 ms.

resultsAnalysis of covariance revealed significant (p < 0.05) group differences in peak FRC, FRC at 30-200 ms, and RFD at 50-90 ms. Significant (p < 0.05) changes in INT but not VOL in peak FRC (INT: 9.2 ± 13.8 %; VOL: -4.3 ± 10.2 %), FRC at 30-200 ms (INT: 12.5-15.8 %; VOL: -1.0 to -4.3 %), and RFD at 50 ms (INT: 78.0 ± 163 %; VOL: -4.1 ± 49.6 %) were observed. A trend (p = 0.052) was observed for RFD at 90 ms (INT: 58.5 ± 115 %; VOL: -3.5 ± 40.1 %). No group differences were observed for the observed changes in barbell velocity.

conclusionsResults indicate that INT is more advantageous than VOL for improving FRC and RFD, while changes in barbell velocity during dynamic strength testing are similarly improved by both protocols in resistance-trained men.

Indexed as

FemaleHigh-Intensity Interval TrainingHumansIsometric ContractionMaleMuscle, SkeletalMuscle StrengthPhysical ExertionPhysical FitnessResistance TrainingYoung AdultBack squat velocityBench press velocityIsometric strengthRate of force development

Identifiers

PMID27744584

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.