ArticleSports (Basel, Switzerland)2018
Profiling Rest Intervals between Sets and Associated Factors in Resistance Training Participants.
Article in Sports (Basel, Switzerland), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prescribed Rest Intervals in Home-Based Exercise Therapy and Rehabilitation: A Narrative Review and Conceptual Framework for Temporal Fidelity.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aims of this study were: (1) to report on and analyse rest interval (RI) control between sets adopted by resistance training (RT) participants; (2) to evaluate how RT participants control RIs; and (3) to describe the factors associated with controlling RIs, such as, gender, RT experience, and professional guidance. Four hundred and fifteen volunteers (198 women and 217 men) answered a questionnaire about RI control. Among the participants, 89.9% (n = 373) reported receiving guidance during physical training, of which 74.5% (n = 278) received instruction from a sports and exercise professional. The proportion of subjects that reported controlling RIs was 71.6% (n = 297). Most subjects that reported controlling RIs (95.0%, n = 282) reported adopting an RI of 60 s or less. There is no association of RI control with gender and professional guidance. The RI adopted by most of the participants might be considered short (<60 s), which is not in line with most RT guidelines. The results of the current study could be used to improve attitudes toward RT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.