Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33666895›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2021

Optimal Training Sequences to Develop Lower Body Force, Velocity, Power, and Jump Height: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

James Marshall, Chris Bishop, Anthony Turner, G Gregory Haff

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 9 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Metabolomics analyses and physical interventions in soccer: a systematic review.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2024
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors.

James MarshallFaculty of Science and Technology, London Sport Institute, Middlesex University, Allianz Park, Greenlands Lane, London, NW4 1RL, UK. James.marshall.2110@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8403-9863
Chris BishopFaculty of Science and Technology, London Sport Institute, Middlesex University, Allianz Park, Greenlands Lane, London, NW4 1RL, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1505-1287
Anthony TurnerFaculty of Science and Technology, London Sport Institute, Middlesex University, Allianz Park, Greenlands Lane, London, NW4 1RL, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5121-432X
G Gregory HaffSchool of Medical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA, 6027, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0676-7750

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResistance training has been used to enhance a range of athletic abilities through correct manipulation of several variables such as training load, training volume, set configuration, and rest period.

objectiveThe aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the acute and chronic responses of lower body cluster, contrast, complex, and traditional training across a range of athletic performance outcomes (1-repetition maximum squat strength, jump height, peak power, peak force, peak velocity, and sprint time).

methodsA database search was completed (SPORTDiscus, Medline and CINAHL) followed by a quality scoring system, which concluded with 41 studies being used in the meta-analysis. Effect sizes were calculated for acute and training intervention changes compared to baseline. For acute cluster training, effect sizes were used to represent differences between equated traditional and cluster sets.

resultsAcutely, contrast and cluster training can be implemented to enhance and maintain velocity. Complex training does not acutely show a performance-enhancing effect on jump performance.

conclusionWhen looking to develop exercise-specific force, the exercise should be completed closer to set failure with fewer repetitions still able to be completed, which can be achieved using complex or high-volume contrast training to pre-fatigue the lighter exercise. When the objective is to improve velocity for the target exercise, it can be combined with a heavier contrast pair to create a postactivation performance enhancing effect. Alternatively, cluster set designs can be used to maintain high velocities and reduce drop-off. Finally, traditional training is most effective for increasing squat 1-repetition maximum.

Indexed as

Athletic PerformanceResistance TrainingExerciseHumansMuscle, SkeletalMuscle StrengthRest

Identifiers

PMID33666895

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.