Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29484512›Full record

ReviewSports medicine - open2018

CrossFit Overview: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

João Gustavo Claudino, Tim J Gabbett, Frank Bourgeois, Helton de Sá Souza, Rafael Chagas Miranda, Bruno Mezêncio, Rafael Soncin, Carlos Alberto Cardoso Filho, Martim Bottaro, Arnaldo Jose Hernandez and 2 more

3 registry-linked trialsAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Sports medicine - open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 142 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
142citing papers in PubMed, 7 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.

NCT04001127 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

High Intensity Functional Training in the Rehabilitation of Cancer Survivors: A Protocol for a Pragmatic Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorAndreas Lund HessnerRan2019 to 2020Enrolled34ConditionsCancerArmsHigh Intensity Functional Training
NCT05682534 completednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Examination of Musculoskeletal System Problems and Affecting Factors in CrossFit Sports

TypeobservationalSponsorEastern Mediterranean UniversityRan2023 to 2023Enrolled65ConditionsCrossFit
NCT06891469 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Effects of an Acute High Dose of Caffeine on Physiological Responses and Performance During a Strength-Focused CrossFit® Workout: a Randomized, Double - Blinded, Crossover Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorDemocritus University of ThraceRan2022 to 2022Enrolled12ConditionsHealthy, Young Adults, Athletic PerformanceArmsCaffeine administration according to body mass (moderate intake- 7 mg/kg), Placebo (Biotin Capsules)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

142 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Physiological effects of regular CrossFitFrontiers in physiology · 2023
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. 6-Week Supplementation withInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Trial
  19. The Effects of High-Intensity Power Training versus Traditional Resistance Training on Exercise Performance.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Trial
  20. Trial

82 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

12 authors.

João Gustavo ClaudinoSchool of Physical Education and Sport, Laboratory of Biomechanics, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. claudinojgo@usp.br.
Tim J GabbettGabbett Performance Solutions, Brisbane, Australia.
Frank BourgeoisSport Performance Research Institute New Zealand, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
Helton de Sá SouzaDepartment of Psychobiology, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Rafael Chagas MirandaDepartment of Psychobiology, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Bruno MezêncioSchool of Physical Education and Sport, Laboratory of Biomechanics, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Rafael SoncinSchool of Physical Education and Sport, Laboratory of Biomechanics, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Carlos Alberto Cardoso FilhoSchool of Physical Education and Sport, Laboratory of Biomechanics, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Martim BottaroCollege of Physical Education, University of Brasília, Brasília, Brazil.
Arnaldo Jose HernandezOrthopedics and Traumatology Institute, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Alberto Carlos AmadioSchool of Physical Education and Sport, Laboratory of Biomechanics, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Julio Cerca SerrãoSchool of Physical Education and Sport, Laboratory of Biomechanics, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCrossFit is recognized as one of the fastest growing high-intensity functional training modes in the world. However, scientific data regarding the practice of CrossFit is sparse. Therefore, the objective of this study is to analyze the findings of scientific literature related to CrossFit via systematic review and meta-analysis.

methodsSystematic searches of the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Bireme/MedLine, and SciELO online databases were conducted for articles reporting the effects of CrossFit training. The systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines. The Oxford Levels of Evidence was used for all included articles, and only studies that investigated the effects of CrossFit as a training program were included in the meta-analysis. For the meta-analysis, effect sizes (ESs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated and heterogeneity was assessed using a random-effects model.

resultsThirty-one articles were included in the systematic review and four were included in the meta-analysis. However, only two studies had a high level of evidence at low risk of bias. Scientific literature related to CrossFit has reported on body composition, psycho-physiological parameters, musculoskeletal injury risk, life and health aspects, and psycho-social behavior. In the meta-analysis, significant results were not found for any variables.

conclusionsThe current scientific literature related to CrossFit has few studies with high level of evidence at low risk of bias. However, preliminary data has suggested that CrossFit practice is associated with higher levels of sense of community, satisfaction, and motivation.

Indexed as

High-intensity functional trainingHigh-intensity interval trainingTraining load

Identifiers

PMID29484512
PMCPMC5826907

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.