Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34101157›Full record

ReviewSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2021

Training for Muscular Strength: Methods for Monitoring and Adjusting Training Intensity.

Timothy J Suchomel, Sophia Nimphius, Christopher R Bellon, W Guy Hornsby, Michael H Stone

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review 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 56 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 8 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

56 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Effects ofNutrients · 2025
    Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

5 authors.

Timothy J SuchomelDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, Carroll University, Waukesha, WI, 53186, USA. tsuchome@carrollu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1763-5518
Sophia NimphiusSchool of Medical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Australia.
Christopher R BellonDepartment of Health and Human Performance, The Citadel-The Military College of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, 29409, USA.
W Guy HornsbyDepartment of Coaching and Teaching Studies, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, 26505, USA.
Michael H StoneCenter of Excellence for Sport Science and Coach Education, Department of Exercise and Sport Sciences, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN, 37614, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Linear loading, the two-for-two rule, percent of one repetition maximum (1RM), RM zones, rate of perceived exertion (RPE), repetitions in reserve, set-repetition best, autoregulatory progressive resistance exercise (APRE), and velocity-based training (VBT) are all methods of adjusting resistance training intensity. Each method has advantages and disadvantages that strength and conditioning practitioners should be aware of when measuring and monitoring strength characteristics. The linear loading and 2-for-2 methods may be beneficial for novice athletes; however, they may be limited in their capacity to provide athletes with variation and detrimental if used exclusively for long periods of time. The percent of 1RM and RM zone methods may provide athletes with more variation and greater potential for strength-power adaptations; however, they fail to account for daily changes in athlete's performance capabilities. An athlete's daily readiness can be addressed to various extents by both subjective (e.g., RPE, repetitions in reserve, set-repetition best, and APRE) and objective (e.g., VBT) load adjustment methods. Future resistance training monitoring may aim to include a combination of measures that quantify outcome (e.g., velocity, load, time, etc.) with process (e.g., variability, coordination, efficiency, etc.) relevant to the stage of learning or the task being performed. Load adjustment and monitoring methods should be used to supplement and guide the practitioner, quantify what the practitioner 'sees', and provide longitudinal data to assist in reviewing athlete development and providing baselines for the rate of expected development in resistance training when an athlete returns to sport from injury or large training load reductions.

Indexed as

Resistance TrainingSportsAdaptation, PhysiologicalAthletesHumansMuscle Strength

Identifiers

PMID34101157

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.