Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33886099›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2021

Effects of Variations in Resistance Training Frequency on Strength Development in Well-Trained Populations and Implications for In-Season Athlete Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Matthew Cuthbert, G Gregory Haff, Shawn M Arent, Nicholas Ripley, John J McMahon, Martin Evans, Paul Comfort

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC 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 22 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Matthew CuthbertHuman Performance Laboratory, Directorate of Sport, Exercise, and Physiotherapy, University of Salford, Greater Manchester, UK. m.cuthbert@edu.salford.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-0960-9085
G Gregory HaffHuman Performance Laboratory, Directorate of Sport, Exercise, and Physiotherapy, University of Salford, Greater Manchester, UK.
Shawn M ArentDepartment of Exercise Science, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, USA.
Nicholas RipleyHuman Performance Laboratory, Directorate of Sport, Exercise, and Physiotherapy, University of Salford, Greater Manchester, UK.
John J McMahonHuman Performance Laboratory, Directorate of Sport, Exercise, and Physiotherapy, University of Salford, Greater Manchester, UK.
Martin EvansTechnical Directorate Division, The FA Group, St George's Park, Burton-Upon-Trent, Staffordshire, UK.
Paul ComfortHuman Performance Laboratory, Directorate of Sport, Exercise, and Physiotherapy, University of Salford, Greater Manchester, UK.
Edith Cowan University · AUUniversity of Salford · GBThe Football Association · GBUniversity of South Carolina · USUniversity of Staffordshire · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn-season competition and tournaments for team sports can be both long and congested, with some sports competing up to three times per week. During these periods of time, athletes need to prepare technically, tactically and physically for the next fixture and the short duration between fixtures means that, in some cases, physical preparation ceases, or training focus moves to recovery as opposed to progressing adaptations.

objectiveThe aim of this review was to investigate the effect of training frequency on muscular strength to determine if a potential method to accommodate in-season resistance training, during busy training schedules, could be achieved by utilizing shorter more frequent training sessions across a training week.

methodsA literature search was conducted using the SPORTDiscus, Ovid, PubMed and Scopus databases. 2134 studies were identified prior to application of the following inclusion criteria: (1) maximal strength was assessed, (2) a minimum of two different training frequency groups were included, (3) participants were well trained, and finally (4) compound exercises were included within the training programmes. A Cochrane risk of bias assessment was applied to studies that performed randomized controlled trials and consistency of studies was analysed using I

resultsInconsistency of effects between pre- and post-intervention was low within-group (I

conclusionOver a 6-12-week period, there are no clear differences in maximal strength development between training frequencies, in well-trained populations. Such observations may permit the potential for training to be manipulated around competition schedules and volume to be distributed across shorter, but more frequent training sessions within a micro-cycle rather than being condensed into 1-2 sessions per week, in effect, allowing for a micro-dosing of the strength stimuli.

Indexed as

Resistance TrainingAdaptation, PhysiologicalAthletesHumansMuscle StrengthSeasons

Identifiers

PMID33886099
PMCPMC8363540
OpenAlexW3152781475

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.