Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30971942›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in physiology2019

Pre-training Skeletal Muscle Fiber Size and Predominant Fiber Type Best Predict Hypertrophic Responses to 6 Weeks of Resistance Training in Previously Trained Young Men.

Cody T Haun, Christopher G Vann, C Brooks Mobley, Shelby C Osburn, Petey W Mumford, Paul A Roberson, Matthew A Romero, Carlton D Fox, Hailey A Parry, Andreas N Kavazis and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Molecular predictors of resistance training outcomes in young untrained female adults.Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985) · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Cody T HaunSchool of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Christopher G VannSchool of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
C Brooks MobleySchool of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Shelby C OsburnSchool of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Petey W MumfordSchool of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Paul A RobersonSchool of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Matthew A RomeroSchool of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Carlton D FoxSchool of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Hailey A ParrySchool of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Andreas N KavazisSchool of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Jordan R MoonImpedimed, Inc., Carlsbad, CA, United States.
Kaelin C YoungSchool of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Michael D RobertsSchool of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Auburn University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Limited evidence exists regarding differentially expressed biomarkers between previously-trained low versus high hypertrophic responders in response to resistance training. Herein, 30 college-aged males (training age 5 ± 3 years; mean ± SD) partook in 6 weeks of high-volume resistance training. Body composition, right leg vastus lateralis (VL) biopsies, and blood were obtained prior to training (PRE) and at the 3-week (W3) and 6-week time points (W6). The 10 lowest (LOW) and 10 highest (HIGH) hypertrophic responders were clustered based upon a composite hypertrophy score of PRE-to-W6 changes in right leg VL mean muscle fiber cross-sectional area (fCSA), VL thickness assessed via ultrasound, upper right leg lean soft tissue mass assessed via dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and mid-thigh circumference. Two-way ANOVAs were used to compare biomarker differences between the LOW and HIGH clusters over time, and stepwise linear regression was performed to elucidate biomarkers that explained significant variation in the composite hypertrophy score from PRE to W3, W3 to W6, and PRE to W6 in all 30 participants. PRE-to-W6 HIGH and LOW responders exhibited a composite hypertrophy change of +10.7 ± 3.2 and -2.1 ± 1.6%, respectively (

Indexed as

high respondermTORproteolysisresistance trainingribosome biogenesis

Identifiers

PMID30971942
PMCPMC6445136
OpenAlexW2924096149

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.