Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33312275›Full record

ArticleJournal of human kinetics2020

The Effects of Low-Load Vs. High-Load Resistance Training on Muscle Fiber Hypertrophy: A Meta-Analysis.

Jozo Grgic

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of human kinetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Strength Training in Swimming.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Review
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

1 author.

Jozo GrgicInstitute for Health and Sport (IHES), Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this meta-analysis was to explore the effects of low-load vs. high-load resistance training on type I and type II muscle fiber hypertrophy. Searches for studies were performed through ten databases. Studies were included if they: (a) compared the effects of low-load vs. high-load resistance training (performed to momentary muscular failure); and, (b) assessed muscle fiber hypertrophy. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to analyze the data. Ten study groups were included in the analysis. In the meta-analysis for the effects of low-load vs. high-load resistance training on type I muscle fiber hypertrophy, there was no significant difference between the training conditions (standardized mean difference: 0.28; 95% confidence interval: -0.27, 0.82; p = 0.316; I

Indexed as

cross-sectional areaCSAintensityloading zonesvolume

Identifiers

PMID33312275
PMCPMC7706639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.