Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31190324›Full record

ReviewSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2019

Resistance Training and Skeletal Muscle Protein Metabolism in Eumenorrheic Females: Implications for Researchers and Practitioners.

Olivia E Knowles, Brad Aisbett, Luana C Main, Eric J Drinkwater, Liliana Orellana, Séverine Lamon

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. The Effect of Fava Bean (Nutrients · 2022
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Sexual dimorphisms in skeletal muscle: current concepts and research horizons.Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985) · 2024
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Olivia E KnowlesInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Geelong, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia.
Brad AisbettInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Geelong, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia.
Luana C MainInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Geelong, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia.
Eric J DrinkwaterCentre for Sport Research, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Liliana OrellanaBiostatistics Unit, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Séverine LamonInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Geelong, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia. severine.lamon@deakin.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3271-6551
Deakin University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Resistance training is essential for health and performance and confers many benefits such as increasing skeletal muscle mass, increasing strength and power output, and improving metabolic health. Resistance training is a major component of the physical activity guidelines, yet research in female populations is limited. Recent increases in the promotion of, and the participation by, females in sport and exercise, highlight the need for an increase in understanding of evidence-based best practice exercise prescription for females. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the current research regarding resistance training performance and skeletal muscle adaptation in females, with a focus on the hormonal variables that may influence resistance training outcomes. Findings suggest that the menstrual cycle phase may impact strength, but not skeletal muscle protein metabolism. In comparison, oral contraception use in females may reduce skeletal muscle protein synthesis, but not strength outcomes, when compared to non-users. Future research should investigate the role of resistance training in the maintenance of skeletal muscle protein metabolism during pregnancy, menopause and in athletes experiencing relative energy deficiency in sport. The review concludes with recommendations for researchers to assist them in the inclusion of female participants in resistance training research specifically, with commentary on the most appropriate methods of controlling for, or understanding the implications of, hormonal fluctuations. For practitioners, the current evidence suggests possible resistance training practices that could optimise performance outcomes in females, although further research is warranted.

Indexed as

Resistance TrainingAdaptation, PhysiologicalContraceptives, Oral, HormonalFemaleGonadal Steroid HormonesHumansMenstrual CycleMuscle ProteinsMuscle, SkeletalMuscle StrengthSex FactorsContraceptives, Oral, HormonalGonadal Steroid HormonesMuscle Proteins

Identifiers

PMID31190324
OpenAlexW2951921414

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.