ArticlePloS one2020
Physiological differences between advanced CrossFit athletes, recreational CrossFit participants, and physically-active adults.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.
- CrossFit® Training Strategies from the Perspective of Concurrent Training: A Systematic Review.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Acute effect of a multi-ingredient pre-workout supplement on pacing and kinetic expression during shorter and longer bouts of high intensity functional training.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2025Trial
- Understanding the effects of beetroot juice intake on CrossFit performance by assessing hormonal, metabolic and mechanical response: a randomized, double-blind, crossover design.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2020Trial
- Physiological Profile, Mediterranean Diet Adherence and Supplement Use in Recreational Adults Engaged in Contemporary Gym-Based Exercise Modalities.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Biomechanical and Physiological Demands of CrossFit: A Systematic Review.Journal of human kinetics · 2026Review
- 'Guard' Workout: Can a Lifeguard-Specific High-Intensity Functional Training Reflect Rescue Demands?Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2026Article
- Optimizing High-Intensity Functional Training Performance: Individualized Load Prescription vs. Standardized Weights.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Public Safety Heroes (PUSH) Workout: Task-Specific High-Intensity Functional Training for Emergency Readiness in Fire and Police-Proof of Concept.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2026Article
- The overload loop: a distinct reoxygenation pattern above the second ventilatory threshold revealed by a new analytical method.Biology of sport · 2026Article
- Effects of a 12-Week CrossFit-Adapted Program on Balance, Functional Mobility, and Lower-Limb Power in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Describing Dietary Habits and Body Composition Among High-Intensity Functional Training Athletes: A Mixed Methods Approach.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Foam Roller Post-High-Intensity Training for CrossFit Athletes: Does It Really Help with Recovery?Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Article
- Sport-Related Injuries in Portuguese CrossFitMuscles (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Acute physiological responses and performance determinants in HyroxFrontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- Comparison of physiological and psychobiological acute responses between high intensity functional training and high intensity continuous training.Sports medicine and health science · 2025Article
- The physical demands and physiological responses to CrossFit®: a scoping review with evidence gap map and meta-correlation.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Comparison between Measured and Predicted Resting Metabolic Rate Equations in Cross-Training Practitioners.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Physical and Physiological Characteristics of Elite CrossFit Athletes.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Trunk, Mass Grasp, Knee, and Hip Muscle Performance in CrossFit Participants: Reference Values According to Participants' Sex and Limb Dominance.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This investigation examined anthropometric, hormonal, and physiological differences between advanced (ADV; n = 8, 27.8 ± 4.2 years, 170 ± 11 cm, 79.8 ± 13.3 kg) and recreational (REC; n = 8, 33.5 ± 8.1 years, 172 ± 14 cm, 76.3 ± 19.5 kg) CrossFit (CF) trained participants in comparison to physically-active controls (CON; n = 7, 27.5 ± 6.7 years, 171 ± 14 cm, 74.5 ± 14.3 kg). ADV and REC were distinguished by their past competitive success. REC and CON were resistance-trained (>2 years) and exercised on 3-5 days·wk-1 for the past year, but CON utilized traditional resistance and cardiovascular exercise. All participants provided a fasted, resting blood sample and completed assessments of resting metabolic rate, body composition, muscle morphology, isometric mid-thigh pull strength, peak aerobic capacity, and a 3-minute maximal cycle ergometer sprint across two separate occasions (separated by 3-7 days). Blood samples were analyzed for testosterone, cortisol, and insulin-like growth factor-1. Compared to both REC and CON, one-way analysis of variance revealed ADV to possess lower body fat percentage (6.7-8.3%, p = 0.007), greater bone and non-bone lean mass (12.5-26.8%, p ≤ 0.028), muscle morphology characteristics (14.2-59.9%, p < 0.05), isometric strength characteristics (15.4-41.8%, p < 0.05), peak aerobic capacity (18.8-19.1%, p = 0.002), and 3-minute cycling performance (15.4-51.1%, p ≤ 0.023). No differences were seen between REC and CON, or between all groups for resting metabolic rate or hormone concentrations. These data suggest ADV possess several physiological advantages over REC and CON, whereas similar physiological characteristics were present in individuals who have been regularly participating in either CF or resistance and cardiovascular training for the past year.
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.