ArticleFrontiers in physiology2019
Effects of Pre-exhaustion Versus Traditional Resistance Training on Training Volume, Maximal Strength, and Quadriceps Hypertrophy.
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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The impact of resistance training on gluteus maximus hypertrophy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Pooled it
- Rethinking task failure in resistance training research: a framework for submaximal exercise prescription.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Review
- Front-Loading Fatigue: Does the Pre-exhaustion Method influence Resistance Training-induced Muscular Adaptations?International journal of exercise science · 2026Article
- The Pre-Exhaustion Method Does Not Increase Muscle Activity in Target Muscle During Strength Training in Untrained Individuals.Journal of human kinetics · 2022Article
- Pre-exhaustion Training, a Narrative Review of the Acute Responses and Chronic Adaptations.International journal of exercise science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe pre-exhaustion (PreEx) method is used as a resistance training (RT) method to increase muscle mass, yet the chronic effects of this method are poorly understood.
objectiveAlthough readily prescribed as a RT method for promotion of muscle hypertrophy, few researches give light to gains made after chronic PreEx RT. Therefore, we compared the effects of traditional versus PreEx RT programs on muscle strength, body composition, and muscular hypertrophy in adult males.
methodsUntrained subjects (age: 31.37 ± 6.83 years; height: 175.29 ± 5.52 cm; body mass: 82.04 ± 13.61 kg; 1RM leg press: 339.86 ± 61.17 kg; 1RM leg extension: 121.71 ± 11.93 kg) were submitted to 9 weeks of RT with weekly sessions. Traditional (TRT) group (
resultsPreEx group increased in maximal strength on leg press (16 ± 8%) and leg extension (17 ± 11%), while the TRT group improved by 15 ± 9 and 11 ± 4%, respectively. The thickness of the quadriceps muscles increased for both intervention groups. Specifically, the post-training thickness of the vastus lateralis was significantly higher for PreEx (55%) compared to the CON group. The TRT group presented a greater loss of total and thigh fat mass when compared with the PreEx method. These results were found in the presence of a lower training load for the PreEx group.
conclusionThe PreEx training can decrease the total training volume while maintaining results in strength and hypertrophy when comparing to TRT. However, TRT may be optimal if the goal is to decrease fat mass.
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.